Wild Salmon Strategy Science and Evidence Board minutes: February 2024

Minutes from the meeting of the wild salmon strategy science and evidence board on 28 February 2024.


Attendees and apologies

  • John Armstrong, Marine Directorate (Chair)
  • Nora Hanson, Marine Directorate
  • Lyndsay Christie, Marine Directorate 
  • Antje Branding, Marine Directorate 
  • Alan Wells, Fisheries Management Scotland 
  • Colin Bean, NatureScot 
  • Melanie Smith, Atlantic Salmon Trust
  • Lorraine Hawkins, Dee District Salmon Fishery Board
  • David Summers, Tay District Salmon Fishery Board
  • James Hunt, Tweed Foundation

Apologies:

  • Stuart Middlemas, Marine Directorate
  • Chris Todd, St Andrews University 
  • Peter Pollard, Scottish Environment Peotection Agency

Items and actions

Welcome

  • JA welcomed everyone to the meeting and thanked everyone for the comments on the summary of evidence document on stocking circulated in advance of the meeting

Minutes of previous meeting 

  • minor comments on minutes from meeting on 21 November 2023. The comments were agreed by all board members and the minutes will be updated accordingly

Review the draft summary document and consideration of questions posed

  • reminder to all that the stocking options being discussed are being considered only in situations where populations are at a critically low level
  • discussion on how these critically low populations should be determined. Agreement from members that a separate meeting to discuss and agree this is required
  • discussion on the evidence relating to redistribution of eggs. General agreement that egg redistribution could be supported if there is evidence of high mortality in natural redds and all other habitat related pressures have been addressed. Acknowledgment that expertise is required to ensure eggs are properly handled
  • discussion on the evidence relating to redistribution of fry. General agreement that the risks associated with fry redistribution are very high and this would not be supported
  • discussion on the evidence relating to kelt reconditioning, noting that this includes pre- and post-spawning fish and risks may need to be assessed differently for each. General agreement that kelt reconditioning could be supported if there is evidence of a bottleneck and other habitat related pressures have been addressed
  • discussion on the evidence relating to smolt to adult supplementation (SAS). General agreement that there is very limited information and data available on SAS so could only be supported as part of a scientific research programme with an appropriate monitoring strategy in place

Next steps

  • to agree and finalise the summary of evidence the following next steps are required
  • the current summary will be redrafted based on comments received from board members in writing and at the meeting
  • recommendations will be drafted for comment
  • guidance documents to accompany the recommendations will be drafted
  • the drafting of the above will be shared across all board representatives

Update on the Upper Dee scientific study on introductions approaches 

  • LH gave an overview of the Dee save the spring project outlining the two pronged approach of wild fish repopulation and restoring natural processes
  • the project will be trialling kelt reconditioning and SAS as part of a research programme in collaboration with the University of Stirling
  • the board will be kept up to date with progress and this project provides an opportunity to provide evidence on the risks, opportunities and best practice of SAS

Gene banking- review

  • John Gilbey (Marine Directorate) will undertake a review on gene banking
  • this will focus on what modern gene banking would look like and what the risks, issues and considerations are
  • lessons will be learnt from Norwegian efforts
  • once completed the review will be shared with board members

Hot topics

  • AW raised the issue that over ten years ago Scottish Minsters asked SEPA to deliver river basin management plan improvements on hydro electricity within a cap of no more than 2% loss of generation. AW requested the board consider if this approach should be amended to place a stronger focus on protection and improvement of the environment in light of the wild salmon and biodiversity crises and significant additional low carbon generation coming on stream
  • the comment has been noted for consideration at a future meeting
Back to top