Coarse fish in Scotland: from vermin control to asset management

The key theme of this conference is the interaction between fishery management and conservation. This relationship can be vulnerable to perceived conflicts of interest between the welfare of fish populations and their exploitation as a sporting resource. The picture in Scotland is further complicated by the fact that coarse fish have traditionally been relegated to secondary status, perhaps because coarse angling has been a minority pursuit here. Thus they have neither been managed positively nor afforded conservation protection. Some fishery managers and conservationists - not to mention anglers - justify this by portraying coarse species as unwelcome latecomers which interact with the natives only as ravenous competitors or predators and deserve nothing better than summary eradication. Much the same used to be said of the Irish, but nowadays we live in more enlightened times - certainly as regards human enthnicity.

For those of us who value coarse fish as sporting species and welcome the diversity which they provide to our freshwater fauna the task is therefore to establish their status in both fishery management and conservation terms before considering the interaction between the two. This paper seeks to support the legitimacy of coarse fish species as an established component of Scotland's wildlife which require appropriate conservation, and argues for their place within an integrated fishery management strategy.

For many, the concept of conservation entails maintaining - or seeking to restore - something which approximates to the natural biodiversity of the habitat concerned. Viewed from that perspective, the matter of whether, and if so which, coarse species are native to Scotland is held to have considerable importance. Unfortunately, this question has no ready answer. To a layman, the way in which terms such as "indigenous", "original colonisers", "alien", "introduced", "long-established", "locally non-native", "exotic" and so on are used to describe various species can be ambiguous. Some of these terms lack clear formal definitions; and even where they are fairly well understood, it seems there is no unequivocal consensus over which species are encompassed by each.

Even taking "native" to mean "species which reached their present location unaided by man", some contentious issues remain unresolved. The diversity and distribution of Scotland's fish populations is the result of a dynamic process which depends on many ever-changing factors and continues to this day. Much of our knowledge of the timing and manner in which fish stocks became established rests on inference and speculation. With very few exceptions, one cannot be sure that any particular population of wholly freshwater species in a location which was icebound in the last glaciation is native to that water.

The earliest post-glacial colonisation of Scottish freshwaters is generally accepted as having been by the marine route. It involved species such as mullet and flounders which favour estuarine habitats but commonly also exploit opportunities to feed or shelter in freshwater, and those such as salmon and eels which require to spend part of their life cycle in freshwater. It is presumed that some anadromous species developed landlocked variants which subsequently became the first truly freshwater fish in Scotland.

The apparent simplicity of this marine hypothesis is attractive, although it begs some interesting questions about the parallel evolution of freshwater variants in numerous unconnected locations over a comparatively short span of time. Whilst it can account for some early colonisation, it is not necessarily the sole means by which fish populations became naturally established in Scotland. Colonisation may have been taking place by any or all of several alternative channels throughout the same period. During floods, fish can traverse watersheds or be swept out of the mouth of one river and swim into another. They can also be translocated by eggs adhering to birds legs, regurgitated alive by avian predators, or even caught up in waterspouts and deposited many miles from their home waters. These avenues provide the possibility not only of secondary distribution of species initially established as a result of marine colonisation, but of a wider range of species being admitted to the body of the Kirk. The historical distribution in Scotland of pike, perch, roach, minnows and stone loach points to a strong likelihood that their presence originates in natural, non-maritime means of colonisation, and a reasonable argument can also be made that similar processes may account for the presence of dace, gudgeon and chub in some rivers adjacent to the English border.

It would perhaps be more sensible to disregard the question of what fish are native to Scotland. The border between Scotland and England is no more than a line drawn on a map - a social and political artefact, not an environmental boundary. It did not exist at all in any meaningful sense for most of the period since the last glaciation, and has not even remained static through recorded history. To say that species which are native elsewhere in Britain are not native to Scotland leads to absurd conclusions. Would a dace be a native of the country it is in when it happens to be nearer the southern bank of the Tweed or the Sark, but an alien when it swims across the river? Individual waters are valid units within which to define "nativeness", as perhaps are whole catchments. Beyond that it is meaningful only to consider what is native to the landmass - in our case the UK mainland - rather than be mesmerised by administrative boundaries. Political borders may or may not be necessary for human societies to function, but it is irrational to suggest that they have any biological validity.

One might go further and say that the whole issue of nativeness is a blind alley. We can speculate endlessly like mediaeval theologians debating how many angels could dance on the head of a pin, but in the end we all tend to choose the paradigm which best suits the species in which we have a vested interest. When it comes down to it, all freshwater fish species in Scotland are incomers - as indeed are humans. All that differs is the timing and manner of their arrival, and for virtually every population of fish that lies in the realm of the unknowable. Regardless of how they first reached Scotland, the present distribution of most fish species is a product of human intervention, and many of the habitats they occupy owe as much to the hand of man as they do to nature. We are where we are, and rather than basing decisions on what might or might not have inhabited an environment which no longer exists and will never return, we ought to address the environment and its inhabitants as they exist now.

If fishery managers and conservationists can transcend the largely sterile debate over nativeness, the next step is to consider how coarse species fit into the present Scottish aquatic environment.

Many niches - and some whole habitats - would be virtually lifeless without coarse fish, which can thrive in conditions which are ill-suited to others such as salmonids. For example, cyprinids in rivers will tend to be most at home in the slower siltier reaches immediately above the tidal zone, and both in rivers and in lochs they can generally tolerate higher temperatures, greater nutrient loads and lower oxygen levels.

On the other hand, in some waters coarse fish coexist closely with others. In the main this seems to be without ill effect, and in the great majority of waters in Scotland there are no grounds to suggest that competition from coarse species has any significant impact on, for instance, the level of salmonid stocks. Whilst pike and perch are undoubtedly responsible for some predation on other species, it is similarly doubtful whether this adds to overall predation or merely substitutes their bellies for those of cormorants or seals as the final resting place for an inevitable and fairly stable proportion of the salmonid population.

All this is not to say that coarse fish are invariably benign or neutral in their interactions with populations of other species; but equally it is inaccurate to characterise them as detrimental to more "worthy" species wherever both are present. Regrettably, many who hold the latter views have been in a position to act out their prejudices, despite the lack of sound evidence to support these perceptions. As a result coarse fish stocks have been reduced or eradicated in some waters by a variety of means. For example:-

It is disturbing enough that such practices go on, but all the more so to note the absence of any statutory conservation measures to protect coarse fish in these circumstances. Dialogue between coarse fish interests and others is improving, and already shows signs of having an impact on the situation. However, it is ultimately for the authorities to prevent - or at the very least actively discourage - abuses of this kind. The law should not differentiate between trout, salmon or coarse fish in that respect. For instance:-

The other side of the conservation coin must be an acknowledgement that the freedom to introduce new species and translocate existing species between waters ought not to remain essentially unrestricted as it is at present. Controls, and effective machinery for monitoring and enforcement, are required with regard to introductions and movements of all species. The issue for control, however, should not be whether the species concerned is "native" to Scotland - or indeed whether it has an adipose fin - but whether it is appropriate to the habitat in question and what impact the introduction or translocation might have on other occupants of that environment.

Those judgements must be made on the basis of fact rather than the erroneous presumption that all coarse fish are potentially invasive and aggressive. A few species, such as zander, may fit that description and pose such substantial risks as to make them clearly unwelcome. But these are a small minority, and there is no reason why statutory controls should prevent reasonable movements and introductions of coarse species which are suited to the waters concerned, unlikely to proliferate, and do not present any meaningful risk to its current inhabitants. This issue must be addressed not by way of blanket prohibition - or restrictions so tight as to act as bans - but by constructive consideration of the issues presented by each species in each water.

Probably because of water temperature patterns, species such as chub and carp appear barely able to breed at all in most Scottish waters. Growth rates tend to be slow, and any reproduction which does take place generally only makes up for attrition from age and predation. For practical purposes these species can be viewed as virtually sterile, and their movements need be no more or less tightly controlled than those of rainbow trout. Regulation in these cases should focus primarily on the health of stock fish.

Greater caution is necessary over the introduction of fish such as rudd or dace which could multiply freely, even if they are unlikely to interact negatively with other species. Any risk will be at a minimum in enclosed waters unconnected to river systems, but they need not be restricted to those environments. For example, the lower reaches of some rivers offer good habitats for coarse species (and poor conditions for salmonids) and feature natural or man-made barriers like waterfalls or weirs which in most cases would serve as effective containment measures.

It is nevertheless acknowledged that the balance of fish populations in a particular water can become distorted, and that there may be a risk of detriment to some resident species as a result. Where this is detected, proper scientific evaluation may reveal a need for control over the numbers of some of the species present. If that arises, it must be addressed swiftly and humanely, interfering as little as possible with any of the species concerned. All practicable steps should be taken to identify a suitable water to which the fish in question can be relocated, rather than simply removing and killing them.

Many fisheries in Scotland have long permitted people to pursue coarse fish - sometimes with the objective of contributing to their removal - but few have done anything to enhance the quality of coarse angling. The management of coarse species has in the past largely focussed on reducing their numbers with the aim of making way for other more sought-after species.. This has generally been accompanied by a lamentable absence of knowledge concerning the stocks of the species in question, coupled with ill-informed presumptions about the potential impact of attempts to control their numbers. In some waters, for example, the direct consequence of the removal of large pike has been an explosion of smaller ones.

In some places this pattern continues, but the last few years have shown significant changes. Several local authorities have developed public park lochs as coarse fisheries. A growing number of hotels, guest houses and holiday parks - especially in Dumfries and Galloway - have created or taken on the management of coarse fisheries as amenities for their clients. On the Lowland canals British Waterways are taking steps to improve the management of the long neglected coarse fish population to enhance the fishery, and have introduced a fish rescue policy during engineering works. Some commercial trout fisheries have diversified by creating stocked "coarse ponds", and in the last few months Scotland's first wholly coarse angling commercial fishery has opened at Magiscroft. Other trout fisheries - notably Lake of Menteith - have successfully extended their seasons by allowing privileged access pike angling events. Some of these developments have been underpinned by significant investments in stock fish or habitat improvement, but in many cases all that has been required is a pragmatic recognition of the revenue potential and amenity value that a more positive approach to coarse fish and coarse angling can bring.

Notwithstanding the changes that have taken place so far, the potential for coarse angling in Scotland remains substantially untapped, especially in respect of our wild pike fisheries. Waters such as Loch Lomond and Loch Awe are already renowned as unique and internationally important sporting assets. Other waters contain pike in prolific numbers or specimen proportions and could be equally valuable and popular, but many are unexploited. As riparian owners increasingly recognise that pike are an asset rather than a detriment to their fisheries, it is inevitable that more of these waters will be opened up. This will bring a growing need for more active management of the species. Although pike fishing - like all coarse angling - is invariably pursued on a catch-and-release basis, it will be necessary to monitor stocks carefully as exploitation grows. Pike are notoriously vulnerable to intensive angling pressure and the incidence of repeat captures can mask significant decline in populations which may already be surprisingly small.

There is also scope to cater for other coarse angling interests, albeit perhaps on a smaller scale. Scotland has superb perch fisheries, although this is a rather unfashionable species among anglers. Some very good roach are also to be found, often in waters best known for salmon and trout. Many coarse anglers avidly pursue grayling in winter, and waters such as the Nith, the Tweed and the Tay system offer some of the best grayling fishing in Britain. In all these cases, as with much of Scotland's pike angling, management of the fishery depends more on a positive state of mind than a set of costly stocking and habitat measures. What is required is better access to the fisheries, the lifting of restrictions on the baits and methods best suited to catching coarse fish and, of course, the cessation of culling and removals.

The emergent dialogue between coarse angling interests and others over the last few years has contributed much to the management and availability of coarse fishing in many locations. The growth in scientific fisheries trusts has provided focal points for that in some areas, and has in general stimulated a better informed and more balanced approach by owners and managers. However, there is a long way still to go, and once more it is proper to look to the authorities to provide statutory underpinning to strengthen and widen the coverage of these largely voluntary and informal developments.

Freshwater fisheries legislation in Scotland has always been fundamentally salmo-centric. That is no longer a tenable basis for regulating either our sport or our environment. In particular, the system of Protection Orders established under the 1976 Act to control fishing for non-migratory species is fundamentally flawed in numerous respects. In almost every instance it has failed in its limited objective of promoting responsible access for angling at reasonable cost. Scotland urgently needs comprehensive new legislation which effectively links conservation, access and the effective management of each fishery.

In the main, coarse fish have not been well-served in the past by legislators, conservationists or fishery managers. It is clear, however, that the situation is improving and there is considerable cause for optimism about the future. Recent consultative documents from the Scottish Executive have been particularly positive regarding the position of coarse species and the promotion of coarse angling. The Scottish Federation for Coarse Angling (SFCA) welcomed many of the proposals and commitments in the Green Paper Scotland's freshwater fish and fisheries: securing their future, especially those concerning:-

SFCA has also been an active participant from the outset in the Angling for Change (AfC) initiative. This unique partnership has brought together the governing bodies of game and coarse angling with other angling interests, environmental organisations, scientific fisheries specialists and associations representing fishery owners and managers in Scotland to address the issues raised in developing more effective legislative and management structures for Scotland's freshwater fish and fisheries. AfC has been a forum for constructive debates which on many issues have resulted in a level of broad consensus and mutual understanding that would have been inconceivable even a decade ago. Together with the ever stronger local presence of scientific fisheries trusts it provides the machinery for robust and permanent dialogue between the key parties in Scottish freshwater fisheries. Therein lies the future.

Coarse fish are a legitimate and largely benign component of Scotland's wildlife, and a valuable sporting resource which deserves greater recognition and could bear wider exploitation. The prime objective of coarse angling interests in Scotland is no more or less than to achieve a level playing field. In order to achieve that :-