Thanks Thanks:  2
Likes Likes:  18
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 19 of 19
  1. #11

    Default

    My post wasn’t all together serious.

    In pedant’s corner though 10.000 is 10 which is £10 in my money. On the other hand, with a comma 10,000 is is £10,000

    Whatever it is, they’re clearly all happy enough to pay it. I’ve never fished the Dee, but like so many have read about it over the years. What stood out to me was that they recorded only 711 Spring fish.

    The habitat stuff is great work but the Deer legs seem to be the very definition of clutching at straws.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Stirling
    Posts
    6,324

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Henke View Post
    Can anyone (in short form) tell me how the staff (15-20 persons) is financed together with the normal costs ?? I mean what do the beats have to pay to the board pr. year ?
    Anybody have knowledge about what the owners pays to the board/year ? (of course depending of the beat/length/rods etc..).
    I'm not close enough to the Dee to help on levies. What I do know is that on the Forth, despite plummeting catches, the board continue to crank up the ante at every opportunity and increase levies. They range from £1.5k to £52k per beat. Of course, that in itself would not finance the lavish expenditure of the board, they also apply for grant aid to save the lampreys, water voles and kill invasive plants, each of which, of course, comes with a biologist to manage the project. It is like a pyramid scheme, the more the employees get, the more the gaffer gets in responsibility payments. That is how it works Henke. And yet the salmon numbers nose dive under their watch.
    I find it difficult to comprehend how they would survive in the real world.
    Last edited by keirstream; 18-10-2019 at 12:39 AM.
    Respect My Authorita!!

  3. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by keirstream View Post
    I'm not close enough to the Dee to help on levies. What I do know is that on the Forth, despite plummeting catches, the board continue to crank up the ante at every opportunity and increase levies. They range from £1.5k to £52k per beat. Of course, that in itself would not finance the lavish expenditure of the board, they also apply for grant aid to save the lampreys, water voles and kill invasive plants, each of which, of course, comes with a biologist to manage the project. It is like a pyramid scheme, the more the employees get, the more the gaffer gets in responsibility payments. That is how it works Henke. And yet the salmon numbers nose dive under their watch.
    I find it difficult to comprehend how they would survive in the real world.

    Now if Salmon was classed as a commodity business like the oil industry in its current state there would be brutal pay cuts and job losses .

    Don't want to see any job losses of course but day ticket prices need to come down so rates surely need to come down.
    You cant keep charging more for something that's not as good.


    BM
    Last edited by Ben-Macdui; 18-10-2019 at 11:22 AM.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Aberdeen
    Posts
    7,066

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ben-Macdui View Post
    Now if Salmon was classed as a commodity business like the oil industry in its current state there would be brutal pay cuts and job losses .

    Don't want to see any job losses of course but day ticket prices need to come down so rates surely need to come down.
    You cant keep charging more for something that's not as good.


    BM
    Sadly, I know of one Dee ghillie laid off today, two weeks before his first child is due. Absolutely shocking as it's well known how deep the owners pockets are. He happily pays out huge amounts to help Dee Projects (fair play there) but I'd rather have seen him look after his employee first!

    Ah, there goes me banned from half the Dee next year....lol
    ..........so many flies, so little time!

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Aberdeen
    Posts
    7,066

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grassy_Knollington View Post
    My post wasn’t all together serious.

    In pedant’s corner though 10.000 is 10 which is £10 in my money. On the other hand, with a comma 10,000 is is £10,000

    Whatever it is, they’re clearly all happy enough to pay it. I’ve never fished the Dee, but like so many have read about it over the years. What stood out to me was that they recorded only 711 Spring fish.

    The habitat stuff is great work but the Deer legs seem to be the very definition of clutching at straws.



    How so GK?

    That to me, is one of the more sensible projects to date, (more so than the planting of trees in glens that haven't had trees since the last ice age.......though fair play for at least trying to do something!).

    The deer leg thing is quite sensible. It attempts to address the lack of nutrients supplied to - let's face it - some pretty barren streams that would have once had plenty rotting salmon carcasses to add said nutrients. Will it work? Who knows, but I do admire the thinking behind it.
    ..........so many flies, so little time!

  6. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by westie4566 View Post
    Sadly, I know of one Dee ghillie laid off today, two weeks before his first child is due. Absolutely shocking as it's well known how deep the owners pockets are. He happily pays out huge amounts to help Dee Projects (fair play there) but I'd rather have seen him look after his employee first!

    Ah, there goes me banned from half the Dee next year....lol
    Sorry to hear that about the Ghillie.

    I wonder if the beat rates had been cut when the fishing went down hill a few years back to get day ticket prices down to more realistic levels if they would of sold more tickets and the Ghillie kept his job.

    BM

  7. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by westie4566 View Post
    [/I][/B]

    How so GK?

    That to me, is one of the more sensible projects to date, (more so than the planting of trees in glens that haven't had trees since the last ice age.......though fair play for at least trying to do something!).

    The deer leg thing is quite sensible. It attempts to address the lack of nutrients supplied to - let's face it - some pretty barren streams that would have once had plenty rotting salmon carcasses to add said nutrients. Will it work? Who knows, but I do admire the thinking behind it.
    Westie

    As usual these are just my thoughts, could be wrong as always.

    Adding nutrients is going to improve feeding and, if done over a long enough period of time possibly could increase survival & condition of juveniles. This I get.

    I think the project appears to be an example of clutching at straws for the following reasons.

    - Most of the post-spawn Salmon die in the coldest part of the year, Dec-Feb. At this time, very few of the juveniles are actively feeding - in contrast to the situation for Pacific Salmon.

    - Many of the nutrients (N&P) are washed downstream.

    - AFAIU, the only significant nutrient Pathway for juvenile Salmon is from the carcass to bacteria to insect larva.

    - The impact of this Pathway will vary depending on hydrology, geology and annual weather conditions. i.e. A big flood will wash more of the nutrients away than in a dry year, an acidic stream will be less able to absorb the nutrients than a more neutral stream.

    - There are a number of places on the river where the real-world impact of carcass nutrients on subsequent insect life and juvenile production could be measured before starting a project based on an assumption.

    - If we want to feed the pre-smolts and effectively farm them, that’s fine with me. Ideally we’d treat all nursery areas like ‘ranches’ and maximise Smolt production. Feed them, provide reasonable predator protection etc.

    Dressing that up activity up as somehow redressing a natural balance while simultaneously coming down squarely against hatcheries is, to me, the definitive ‘clutching at straws’ bit.

    10p from a non ‘stakeholder’.
    Last edited by Grassy_Knollington; 20-10-2019 at 10:13 AM.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    edzell
    Posts
    2,530

    Default

    Grassy, the nutrients issue is about the only actual argument for C & R. On the North esk head waters there are unpassable waterfalls well up the Mark and Lee. As a kid fishing for trout, there was always a visible difference on fish numbers above and below these falls. The only real difference i could see, was that salmon didn't spawn above the falls. This was probably lack of nutrients from the corpses, but also millions of less eggs to eat.

    Cheers

    Mows

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    cotswolds
    Posts
    2,163

    Default

    I know nothing about the Dee but if I was funding the board I would want to know why the salary bill increased by 20%, pension contributions increased by 25% and motor costs by 25%.

    edit: just noticed that the average number of staff is 11 against a wage bill of £404,000. Surely questions should be asked.
    Last edited by tenet; 20-10-2019 at 11:54 AM.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •