Fish population survey report

The River Great Ouse - Newport Pagnell to Bedford 29th August / 1st November 2017

This report provides a summary of results from the 2017 fish population surveys conducted on the River Great Ouse between Newport Pagnell and Bedford. The surveys were carried out to assess the health of the river and enable successful management of our principal fisheries.

Image 1: A specimen Chub from the River Great Ouse at Oakley.

Summary The 2017 between Newport Pagnell and Bedford was conducted on a low and clear Great Ouse and made some particularly poor catches with density and standing crop estimates much reduced over the long-term average. Match catch results confirm that a slight decline in fishery performance has occurred, but output from this database indicates that this is not as noteworthy as our survey results currently suggest.  Seven sites on the River Great Ouse were surveyed by electric fishing between the 29th of August and the 1st of November.  The 2017 survey was the second round conducted of the new triennial survey cycle. Prior to 2010 many Great Ouse sites were sampled annually.  735 fish of 17 species were recorded. Roach, pike and dace were the most numerous species captured.  Average density and standing crop estimates derived from the seven sites surveyed equate to 2.14 fish per 100m² and 490 grams per 100m² respectively. www.gov.uk/environment-agency

Introduction to Environment Agency fisheries surveys The Environment Agency has a statutory duty to maintain, improve and develop fisheries. Our policy is to do this in a way that maximises the social, recreational and economic benefits arising from the sustainable exploitation of the fish stocks that underpin fisheries. To help deliver this duty, we have a National Fisheries Monitoring Programme (NFMP) to describe the status of our fish populations and inform our fisheries management to meet international (WFD, Eel regulations, ICES reporting), national and local data needs. Sites are regularly reviewed to maintain a representative sample of fish populations and the water body as a whole in order to retain a comparable dataset. Sites designated for the national fisheries monitoring programme cannot be altered, unless there is a valid health and safety concern, access is no longer possible or there has been a review of policy during the monitoring period.

Survey site locations

Site Survey Midstream Name Date Area (m2) N.G.R Catch Method Newport Pagnell 04/09/2017 2945 SP8820444063 DC ELECTRIC FISHING D/s Ravenstone Mill 11/10/2017 2700 SP8622848882 DC ELECTRIC FISHING Clifton Reynes 29/08/2017 2420 SP8940650679 DC ELECTRIC FISHING Turvey 01/11/2017 1615 SP9375152549 DC ELECTRIC FISHING Odell 08/09/2017 1995 SP9677357819 DC ELECTRIC FISHING Oakley 17/10/2017 4200 TL0105752880 DC ELECTRIC FISHING Kempston Mill 05/09/2017 2700 TL0228747643 DC ELECTRIC FISHING

www.gov.uk/environment-agency 2 of 26

Survey methodology Seven sites on the Great Ouse were sampled using electric fishing methodology. Electric fishing is a survey technique that uses the physiological effect of an electric field in water to attract and immobilise fish. Electrodes, immersed in the water, stimulate the fishes nervous system so that it swims towards the operator, or is unable to swim away, and can then be caught with a hand net. In shallow rivers and streams it is generally possible to wade upstream within the river channel using generator-powered equipment, which is towed within a small boat. When rivers deepen or site depth is variable, electric fishing from within a flat-bottomed boat is generally the preferred method. The boat is manoeuvred downstream on long ropes by an operative on either bank controlling the speed, direction of travel and in-channel positioning. Image 2 (right) shows the typical components of an electric fishing system. Stop nets are positioned across the channel to isolate the survey site and prevent fish from migrating into and out of the survey area. The electric fishing operation is repeated until a 50% reduction in the total number of fish caught has been achieved. Captured fish are measured to the nearest millimetre (to the fork of the tail) and scales are taken for age, growth and other statistical analyses at the National Fish Laboratory in Brampton. Population trends will be discussed at site level for all seven sites sampled, and through a more limited long-term data set of five sites. Density and standing crop results are reported utilising fish greater than 99mm in length as electric fishing methodology has been shown to loose capture efficiency on fish below this length, therefore numbers of juvenile fish and small species such as minnow and bullhead should be viewed as a minimum estimates only.

Results  Seven sites on the River Great Ouse were surveyed by electric fishing between the 29th of August and the 1st of November.  The 2017 survey was the second round conducted of the new triennial survey cycle. Prior to 2010 many Great Ouse sites were sampled annually.  735 fish of 17 species were recorded. Roach, pike and dace were the most numerous species captured.  Pike were principle by standing crop.  Average density and standing crop estimates derived from the seven sites surveyed equate to 2.14 fish per 100m² and 490 grams per 100m² respectively.

www.gov.uk/environment-agency 3 of 26

Table 1: Total number and largest (mm) fish captured for key species during the 2017 survey.

Chub Dace Roach Perch Barbel

Site Number Largest Number Largest Number Largest Number Largest Number Largest

Newport Pagnell 18 468 38 222 29 216 11 230 7 365

DS Ravenstone Mill 1 408 6 111 8 245 2 156 - -

Clifton Reynes 3 470 9 199 13 233 1 203 - -

Turvey 4 421 11 223 3 85 2 199 - -

Odell 10 473 22 190 9 192 - - 1 62

Oakley 13 535 50 174 5 119 - - - -

Kempston Mill 1 152 97 165 29 212 2 389 - -

Image 3: A four-year-old barbel from Newport Pagnell

www.gov.uk/environment-agency 4 of 26

Mean density estimate and standing crop estimate by species 2017 The 2017 survey found roach dominant by density and pike principle by standing crop. Pike play a prominent position in these population estimates, the species subdominant position in the density (ranking above dace and chub) a particularly unusual result. The mean density estimate for the River Great Ouse – Newport Pagnell to Bedford has fallen by some 77% since the previous survey cycle in 2014. Density has decreased by a little over 2 Ind./100m2 (from 4.54 Ind./100m2 to 2.14 Ind./100m2 in 2017) and this loss was principally due to poor catches of roach in this current survey cycle, the population estimate for this species falling by 2 Ind./100m2 (from 2.58 Ind. in 2014 to 0.58 Ind./100m2 in 2017).

Validation of these survey results is possible via the Angling Match Catch Database, a log of fishery performance derived from match results provided to the EA. Results generated by the Match Catch system do indicate a slight reduction in fishery performance, but not to the extent suggested by the 2017 survey results. The lack of consensus between the match catch database and our survey results suggests that catches of silver fish in this particular survey cycle may have been reduced due to the low, clear water at the time of survey and the sparse overhead cover present at the majority of our survey sites. Perhaps unsurprisingly, given the river conditions, the highest density catch made in 2017 was made amongst the intermittently shaded reach at Newport Pagnell. This is not to say that the reduction in roach numbers is the only population change observed in the 2017dataset, dace and barbel density is also reduced, the latter species represented only by smaller individuals during this survey cycle. Common bream density remains comparable to the 2014 result and pike density has doubled. When data from all seven sites are examined, chub density is a little down on the last cycle, but in terms of the five sites that constitute the long-term dataset, chub populations are actually quite comparable to the previous survey result.

www.gov.uk/environment-agency 5 of 26

Long-term density estimate: The simple long-term density analysis that follows has been conducted using data from five sites, Newport Pagnell, Clifton Reynes, Turvey, Odell and Oakley. These sites have been selected as having the largest and most closely comparable dataset, but it is important to note that this dataset is imperfect and some gaps in the dataset are present, the Odell site was not sampled in ’01, ’03, ’05 and ’06 and single catch samples in 2007 and 2010 also reduce confidence in the results. Long-term density data (below) shows that population estimates derived during the late 1980’s and early 1990’s are considerably higher than those subsequently attained since the start of the millennium; after which, mean density estimates have been lower, but reasonably consistent around 5 Ind./100m2. Part of the reason for this disparity in density is that, in some of the early surveys, a large proportion of the catch was composed of gudgeon and bleak, species with short life spans that can suddenly boom given optimum spawning conditions. Dace were also strongly represented in the early dataset; the 1988 catch at Newport Pagnell is the highest population density recorded at this location (29.3 Ind/100m2) of which 47% was composed of dace (13.71 Ind/100m2) and 43% was gudgeon 12.71 (Ind./100m2).

Figure 3:

Up until the middle of the 1990’s, population density at Clifton Reynes, Turvey and Oakley was heavily dominated by roach; however the 1997 survey report stated that the population structure of this species was undergoing change, noting that there had been a 50% decline in roach biomass following the loss of previously strong 1989 and 1990-year classes. The 1997 report also stated that recruitment and subsequent survival of roach from spawning in 1991, 1992, 1993 and 1994 had all been poor; an observation supported by the EA report, Factors Affecting Coarse Fish Recruitment (P.A.Frear & I.G.Cowx). This technical report not did not directly examine population data from the Great Ouse, but from rivers across the UK including East Anglian rivers and summarised that “year class strength (YCS) of both roach and dace increased in 1982, with an even stronger roach year class present in 1983. Their YCS remained weak during 1984-1987 and then increased in 1988-90. Roach YCS was again relatively poor until 1995. Dace YCS increased in 1992, but responded less well than roach in the mid-1990’s” The 1997 dataset is incomplete, a number of key sites were not sampled due to increased river flows. The survey report written for that cycle was able to conclude that population density had increased due to very strong representation by roach from the 1995 and 1996 year-classes, but that roach distribution was very limited across the sites sampled, the majority of fish being found at just one location, Emberton Park. The findings of the 1997 survey was that 90% of the roach population recorded was composed of slowly growing 1 and 2 Y.O. fish that, at the time of sampling, averaged just 105mm in length. Five months later, the April 1998 ‘Easter floods’ struck the Great Ouse catchment with peak flows recorded that more than doubled those logged in the preceding five years. This implication of this sequence of events is that a population of small and slow growing roach was faced by one of the largest floods on this catchment in recent years and it is perhaps unsurprising that under such circumstances fish stock decline following this event as downstream displacement would be extremely likely.

www.gov.uk/environment-agency 6 of 26

Subsequent surveys had seen some fish populations steadily recovering, (see the chub & roach population graphs that follow) before density drops once more, possibly in response to the summer flooding events in 2007 and 2008 which had the potential for both stock displacement and disturbance of spawning.

Tables 2-3: Density estimate and Standing crop estimate for fish >99mm

Reach Survey - Results Table for Density (Ind./100m2) >99mm

D/s Newport Clifton Kempston Ravenstone Turvey Odell Oakley Species Pagnell Reynes Mill Mean Mill 04/09/2017 11/10/2017 29/08/2017 01/11/2017 08/09/2017 17/10/2017 05/09/2017 Roach [Rutilus rutilus] 1.56 0.26 0.46 0.00 0.45 0.05 1.30 0.58 Pike [Esox lucius] 0.44 0.22 0.04 0.93 0.10 0.79 0.22 0.39 Dace [Leuciscus leuciscus] 1.29 0.07 0.12 0.06 0.40 0.14 0.63 0.39 Chub [Leuciscus cephalus] 0.65 0.04 0.12 0.25 0.35 0.31 0.04 0.25 Bleak [Alburnus alburnus] 0.58 0 0 0 0.20 0.07 0.26 0.16 Perch [Perca fluviatilis] 0.68 0.07 0.04 0.12 0 0 0.07 0.14 Gudgeon [Gobio gobio] 0.14 0 0.17 0 0.40 0.14 0 0.12 C. bream [Abramis brama] 0.41 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.06 Barbel [Barbus barbus] 0.27 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.04 Tench [Tinca tinca] 0 0 0 0 0.05 0 0 0.01 Zander [Sander lucioperca] 0.03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 6.04 0.67 0.95 1.36 1.96 1.50 2.52 2.14

Reach Survey - Results Table for standing crop (g./100m2) >99mm D/s Clifton Kempston Newport Pagnell Ravenstone Turvey Odell Oakley Species Reynes Mill Mean Mill 04/09/2017 +/-CI 11/10/2017 29/08/2017 01/11/2017 08/09/2017 17/10/2017 05/09/2017 Pike [Esox lucius] 137.2 146.7 123.9 55.9 378.5 188.2 242.8 78.5 172.1 Chub [Leuciscus cephalus] 259.7 60.6 32.4 124.5 225.0 123.1 278.6 1.9 149.3 C. bream [Abramis brama] 492.1 932.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 70.3 Roach [Rutilus rutilus] 102.9 122.7 36.2 32.1 0 29.5 1.1 79.0 40.1 Dace [Leuciscus leuciscus] 68.7 19.7 1.1 10.3 8.5 16.9 5.5 18.5 18.5 Perch [Perca fluviatilis] 51.2 120.0 3.7 6.1 11.3 0 0 47.8 17.2 Barbel [Barbus barbus] 80.8 62.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 11.5 Zander [Sander lucioperca] 42.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6.1 Bleak [Alburnus alburnus] 9.9 0.6 0 0 0 2.6 0.9 3.0 2.3 Gudgeon [Gobio gobio] 2.7 0.8 0 3.1 0 6.3 2.7 0 2.1 Tench [Tinca tinca] 0 - 0 0 0 6.2 0 0 0.9 Total 1247.4 963.8 197.4 232.0 623.3 372.8 531.6 228.8 490.5

Image 4: A zander from Newport Pagnell

www.gov.uk/environment-agency 7 of 26

Site level results Site No. 4673 Site name: Newport Pagnell Date of survey: 04/09/2017

Min Max Mean Numbers Species Figure 4: Species composition (>99mm) Length Length Length Caught Dace [Leuciscus leuciscus] 93 222 148 38 Roach [Rutilus rutilus] 76 216 147 29 Gudgeon [Gobio gobio] 72 134 90 25 Bleak [Alburnus alburnus] 80 135 110 23 Chub [Leuciscus cephalus] 125 468 276 18 Perch [Perca fluviatilis] 101 230 152 11 Pike [Esox lucius] 150 560 285 10 Common bream [Abramis brama] 76 462 339 9 Barbel [Barbus barbus] 216 363 267 7 Spined loach [Cobitis taenia] 61 72 65 3 Ruffe [Gymnocephalus cernuus] 96 98 97 2 Bullhead [Cottus gobio] 65 65 65 1 Minnow [Phoxinus phoxinus] 50 50 50 1 Zander [Sander lucioperca] 516 516 516 1 The catch at Newport Pagnell recorded the highest population density of the 2017 survey cycle and possessed the most diverse population at 14 species including a single zander (pictured on the proceeding page) which was almost certainly an escapee from the nearby Grand Union Canal and demarks the current upstream limit of the species. Examination of the long-term density estimate for this site has shown a decreasing trend over the last three survey cycles, and the loss observed between 2014 and 2017 has been due to a reduction in the roach population which has dropped from around 5 Ind./100m2 in 2011 and 2014 to 1.56 Ind./100m3. Although not captured in any numbers during 2017 match reports showed that roach were shoaling a short distance upstream above the confluence with the River Ouzel. Chub density at Newport Pagnell was just a little below average in 2017 with a current density estimate of 0.65 Ind./100m2 compared to the site average 0.74 Ind./Ind./100m2. In previous reports, I have expressed concern about the lack of juvenile chub caught in surveys; however, when visiting this location in 2017 I observed a shoal of small chub that far outnumbered the combined juvenile component of several recent surveys, suggesting that the survey site may not the preferred habitat for the young of this species? Dace density is currently around half the long-term average, the population at this site having fallen over successive surveys since 2010. The density estimate for this species has been extremely variable over the fifteen surveys conducted, the highest population of 13.7 Ind./100m2 being recorded in 1988 and the lowest (0.24 Ind./100m2) in 2007. Newport Pagnell provided the most numerous catch of barbel during the 2017 cycle barbel with seven individuals measuring between 216 and 363 mm in length captured. There fish are currently too small to be of any interest to anglers, but perhaps offer hope for the species’ future within the Great Ouse. Barbel will be discussed in detail later in this report.

Figure 4a: Density estimate by species at Newport Pagnell (>99mm) composition (>99mm)

www.gov.uk/environment-agency 8 of 26

Site No. 36771 Site name: DS Ravenstone Mill Date of survey: 11/10/2017 Min Max Mean Numbers Species Figure 5: Species composition by density (>99mm) Length Length Length Caught Roach [Rutilus rutilus] 81 245 174 8 Dace [Leuciscus leuciscus] 51 111 84 6 Pike [Esox lucius] 255 612 359 6 Minnow [Phoxinus phoxinus] 48 55 51 3 Perch [Perca fluviatilis] 134 156 145 2 3-sp s-back [Gasterosteus aculeatus] 39 42 41 2 Chub [Leuciscus cephalus] 408 408 408 1 Bullhead [Cottus gobio] 62 62 62 1 The 2017 survey at Ravenstone Mill gave a particularly poor result, roach being dominant by density estimate with a catch of just eight individuals. Fish density at this location has declined over successive surveys since being instated in 2011 to replace a site upstream that had become impossible to survey due to its high, sheer and eroding banks. Although considerably safer to survey than the upper site, this new location is not ideal, possessing a large shallow bay along the left hand bank, which cannot be sampled as the survey boat will ground out and disturb the bed substrate. This essentially means that a proportion of the site cannot be surveyed; reducing confidence in the result and allowing smaller fish species to evade the sampling team. Habitat throughout the survey area is somewhat lacking, degraded, over-widened and with a scarcity of overhead cover Image 5: DS Ravenstone Mill survey site that limits fish holding capacity and the site has considerable opportunity for enhancement and restoration to improve the sites fish population. It should be noted that immediately downstream of the survey site an area of riparian tree cover extends along the left hand bank, some of which reaches out to the channel median (pictured left). It is quite possible that the combination of clear water experienced at the time of survey and lack of holding features within the survey area had led to stock distribution changing to favour the habitat which offers cover, such as the Image 6: Riparian cover beyond the tree lined channel downstream. confines of the survey site

Figure 5a: Density estimate by species at DS Ravenstone Mill (>99mm) composition (>99mm)

www.gov.uk/environment-agency 9 of 26

Site No: 4677 Site name: Clifton Reynes Date of survey: 29/08/2017 Min Max Mean Numbers Species Figure 6: Species composition by density (>99mm) Length Length Length Caught Roach [Rutilus rutilus] 79 233 141 13 Gudgeon [Gobio gobio] 72 118 93 12 Dace [Leuciscus leuciscus] 44 199 113 9 Minnow [Phoxinus phoxinus] 36 51 45 4 Chub [Leuciscus cephalus] 314 470 415 3 Stone loach [Barbatula barbatula] 52 56 54 2 Perch [Perca fluviatilis] 203 203 203 1 Pike [Esox lucius] 536 536 536 1 Bullhead [Cottus gobio] 47 47 47 1 Spined loach [Cobitis taenia] 87 87 87 1 The Clifton Reynes survey site is located on a section of channel quite similar to Ravenstone Mill; the site possesses no riparian tree cover within the immediate survey area, although this is present nearby downstream. The site has also been subject to significant bankside erosion, although the area affected by this latter pressure has been reduced by fencing work. Although the recent results, and indeed many of the historic catches, are rather poor, the EA is extremely fortunate to have a controlling angling club (www.olneyfishing.co.uk) that regularly provides results from matches on its waters. Whilst the Clifton Reynes survey site is not situated within the two areas regularly match fished, it is within close proximity (<1km) to both. Analysis of the match data provided will be provided later in this report but it is worth mentioning that fishery performance indicates a considerably greater fish Image 7: Clifton Reynes survey site population is present than recently found within the Clifton Reynes survey site. The long-term dataset for this site indicates a reduction to population density between 1994 and 1997, a pattern that can also be observed at several other Gt Ouse sites. Fish populations then steadily increased between 2003 and 2006, peaked in 2008 before declining again. The 2017 result is the lowest density estimate on record at this site.

Figure 6a: Density estimate by species at Clifton Reynes (>99mm) composition (>99mm)

www.gov.uk/environment-agency 10 of 26

Site No: 4680 Site name: Turvey Date of survey: 01/11/2017 Min Max Mean Numbers Species Figure 7: Species composition by density (>99mm) Length Length Length Caught Pike [Esox lucius] 180 668 290 15 Dace [Leuciscus leuciscus] 47 223 70 11 Chub [Leuciscus cephalus] 401 421 412 4 Roach [Rutilus rutilus] 41 85 67 3 Perch [Perca fluviatilis] 143 199 171 2 The density estimate derived from the 2017 survey at this site equates to 1.3 Ind./100m2, a figure which is a little less than one tenth of the long term average (10.8 Ind./100m2) This particularly poor result was due to the generally dominant silver fish population being reduced to just a handful of roach and dace. Because of the reduced number of silver fish, species composition was heavily dominated by pike that constituted almost 70% of the density estimate and 43% of the standing crop. The presence of these pike may suggest that a larger population of fodder fish is present nearby. Predatory species outnumbering their prey is an unlikely (and unsustainable) population dynamic that was also replicated downstream at Oakley in 2017. Four large chub were captured at Turvey, all of which were individuals >400 mm long. The current chub density (0.25 Ind./100m2) is around a third of the long term average for the species at this site (0.6 Ind./100m2), but is higher than was recorded here in the last two survey cycles. (0.12 Ind./100m2 in 2011 and 0 Ind./100m2 in 2014). A small number of dace (to a maximum size of 223mm), three small roach (all <100mm long) and two perch completed this disappointing catch. A recent walkover found considerably better quality habitat was present downstream of the survey area with riparian tree growth, stands of in-channel woody material and backwater habitat present. Such an area seems more Image 8: The routine survey site at Turvey likely to attract shoaling silver fish species during clear water conditions.

Figure 7a: Density estimate by species at Turvey (>99mm) composition (>99mm)

www.gov.uk/environment-agency 11 of 26

Site No: 4683 Site name: Odell Date of survey: 08/09/2017 Min Max Mean Numbers Species Figure 8: Species composition by density (>99mm) Length Length Length Caught Bleak [Alburnus alburnus] 57 124 87 23 Dace [Leuciscus leuciscus] 43 190 87 22 Gudgeon [Gobio gobio] 81 118 96 17 Chub [Leuciscus cephalus] 61 473 191 10 Roach [Rutilus rutilus] 115 192 152 9 Minnow [Phoxinus phoxinus] 42 46 44 3 Pike [Esox lucius] 244 730 487 2 Barbel [Barbus barbus] 62 62 62 1 Tench [Tinca tinca] 191 191 191 1 The Odell survey site has changed quite noticeably in recent surveys, narrowing in places due to extensive rush growth. The lower extent of the survey area remains deep and wide. The site was historically sampled using two boat electric fishing methodology with four anodes to accommodate the channel width; whilst in 2017 the site was sampled using a single boat and two anodes. Species composition at Odell was greater than observed upstream at Turvey and the population density estimate was also a little higher at 1.96 Ind./100m2. The long-term density estimate for this site shows the same post 1994 decline observed at several other locations. Since 1997 population density has generally held around the 2 Ind./100m2 (the Image 9: Odell Survey Site exception being 2007). The loss of density between 1994 and 1997 was principally due to a reduction in the number of dace and gudgeon (and to a lesser extent, chub and barbel). Roach density has also been quite changeable, but rather than decline the population can be seen to steadily increase between 1994 and 2007 after which the density declines once to varies between a little more than 1 Ind./100m2 and a little less than 0.5 Ind./100m2 over successive survey cycles.

Image 10: Channel narrowing caused by extensive rush growth Figure 8a: Density estimate by species at Turvey (>99mm) composition (>99mm)

www.gov.uk/environment-agency 12 of 26

Site No. 4688 Site name: Oakley Date of survey: 17/10/2017 Min Max Mean Numbers Species Figure 9: Species composition by density (>99mm) Length Length Length Caught Dace [Leuciscus leuciscus] 44 174 66 50 Gudgeon [Gobio gobio] 62 129 85 41 Minnow [Phoxinus phoxinus] 41 58 50 39 Pike [Esox lucius] 180 655 270 32 Chub [Leuciscus cephalus] 241 535 387 13 Stone loach [Barbatula barbatula] 58 88 70 13 Bullhead [Cottus gobio] 36 68 49 6 Roach [Rutilus rutilus] 33 119 89 5 Bleak [Alburnus alburnus] 105 111 108 3 Spined loach [Cobitis taenia] 64 72 68 2 Our survey site at Oakley is situated just upstream of a large riffle area and is known for occasionally producing some exceptional catches of chub, over 40 individuals being recorded in 2003 and 2005 and two occurrences, in 1994 and 2006, where catches exceeded 50 fish. Such aggregations are undoubtedly impressive, but have been tended to be the exception rather than the rule. Habitat data collected as part of the 2017 survey report low water level, low flow and high water clarity so perhaps it is unsurprising that the 2017 was a particularly poor Image 11: The upper extent of result. The main reason for the reduction in density was Oakley survey site the loss of roach, the population of which has fallen from 5 Ind./100m2 in 2014 to 0.05 Ind./100m2. Dace and gudgeon were the most numerous species captured at Oakley in 2017, appropriate to the riffle habitat present at this location; but the small average size of meant that few of these fish would count towards the site population estimate. Of more interest to the angling community was the continued representation from this locations chub population, which has seen increases to both density and standing crop over the last three survey cycles, from just two fish in 2011 to thirteen individuals in 2017. The most recent catch included a number of year classes, being composed of fish that ranged between 240mm and 535mm long. The largest two chub were weighed by the survey team and found to be specimens of 5lb 60z and 6lb 40z. The most unusual aspect of this survey was the inclusion of 32 pike that averaged 270mm long and were present to a maximum length of 655mm; making the species dominant in terms of both density and standing crop. Does this prevalence of pike mean that there is a larger population of fodder fish nearby? This is difficult to determine, as pike will readily cannibalise the younger and smaller component of their own population and will also predate upon signal crayfish.

Figure 9a: Density estimate by species at Oakley (>99mm) composition (>99mm)

www.gov.uk/environment-agency 13 of 26

Site No. 4691 Site name: Kempston Mill Date of survey: 05/09/2017 Min Max Mean Numbers Species Figure 10: Species composition by density (>99mm) Length Length Length Caught Dace [Leuciscus leuciscus] 36 165 73 97 Roach [Rutilus rutilus] 100 212 146 29 Bleak [Alburnus alburnus] 67 111 92 14 Pike [Esox lucius] 170 540 293 6 Minnow [Phoxinus phoxinus] 38 59 49 5 Perch [Perca fluviatilis] 105 389 247 2 Chub [Leuciscus cephalus] 152 152 152 1 The 2017 population estimate at Kempston 2.51 fish/100m2 a little over a quarter of the 8.2 fish/100m2 long-term average for this location. Much of the decline in density at this site can be attributed to a reduction in the number of roach captured, the current population estimate for this species being 1.29 fish/100m2 following a poor catch of just 29 fish. Although dace were more populous numerically, roach were dominant by density. This was due to a large proportion of the dace captured being <99mm (averaging 73mm) and were therefore not used in the population calculation. The 2017 survey at Kempston Mill is therefore another poor survey result that is not corroborated by fishery performance. Conversation with Nigel Porter, match secretary from Vauxhall Angling Club said that whilst roach numbers were a little down on the previous season fishing has been better than the survey result suggests. The Bedfordshire Hospital Cup Match, conducted in September 2017, included two sections of the Kempston fishery. These were Kempston Top Field where 13 anglers weighed in for a total of 59lbs 15oz (which included weights of over 10lbs) and Kempston Bottom Field where 12 anglers weighed in for 57lbs 9oz. The Oakley fishery was also utilised for this match and the 14 anglers who weighed in recorded a total catch of 83lbs 9oz. In terms of species captured during this match, roach were considered principle followed by dace, chub, perch and bleak, a species composition quite similar to that of the 2017 survey result. Match weights from several other competitions hosted at Kempston have been provided. These show that on the 23rd of July twelve anglers weighing in a total of 120lb of fish which including several double figure nets to 17lb. On the 27th of August, eight anglers weighing in a total catch of 70lb. Total catches decreased over the course of the year and by the time of the last match in October, eight anglers weighed in a total of 40lb. These match results support the suspicion that that the 2017-survey result is not representative of the wider fish population at this location, and, it appears likely that the 2017 catch was impacted by the low and clear water conditions at the time of the survey. The feedback provided by the angling club stated that the low clear river had also made the roach fishing difficult, although some good fish had been caught by pleasure anglers who could pick their location to fish. The 2017 survey at Kempston also recorded the largest perch of the recent survey cycle with an individual captured measuring 389mm long.

Figure 10a: Density estimate by species at Kempston (>99mm) composition (>99mm)

www.gov.uk/environment-agency 14 of 26

Roach: Despite the decline in numbers of roach captured in 2017, the species remained the dominant by density. Prior to this poor result, the species density estimate had been steadily increasing over successive survey cycles, populations perhaps slowly recovering from the two consecutive ‘summer flooding’ years of 2007 and 2008. As stated previously, it seems that the poor survey results attained in this current cycle could well be a consequence of surveying a low, clear river.

Figure 11: Long-term roach density (>99mm)

Under such challenging conditions, it may be advantageous to increase our survey coverage and conduct additional small-scale qualitative sampling around areas that possess better habitat, particularly overhead cover. Sampling such areas may be difficult, maybe even be inefficient, but if fish are observed in large numbers, sheltering outside of the routinely sampled areas, then this provides further validation data for the routine sites and gives a more informed picture of current stocks. Additional coverage would be most easily achieved at sites such as Clifton Reynes and DS Ravenstone Mill where riparian cover is present close to the routine survey site. If the opportunity to increase routine survey coverage occurred; then it would be useful to co-locate a site over the match-angled reach at Olney to allow comparison of survey data with the excellent match catch dataset provided. Surveying a slower ‘ponded’ section of the Great Ouse may also allow a better chance of effectively sampling the rivers roach stocks, the current suite of sites currently seeming a little skewed towards the pacier, riffle type habitat present. This bias was most likely brought about by the increasing importance of the rivers barbel population; meaning that, when monitoring effort has been reduced in the past, the traditional ‘barbel’ sites are the ones that have been retained. That said, one site that previously held a good barbel population (Turvey) has also provided some good catches of roach. Examination of seine netting data conducted on the Olney match fishery (discontinued in 2001) shows that some very inconstant catches were attained; total catches varying between as little as 15 and as many as 1200 roach which indicates that the changeability of stock at site level was an issue for sampling even during the roach population ‘peak’. Figure 11a: Long-term roach density (>99mm) at site level

Scale readings derived from the few roach that were captured in 2017 found individuals to a maximum of six years old were present and determined that roach were exhibiting slow growth with a PSG of 89% suggesting that the species is struggling to find sufficient food resource to achieve optimum growth and indicating competition, either from other

www.gov.uk/environment-agency 15 of 26

fish species, a larger roach population than the survey suggests, or signal crayfish. This is not the first instance when roach have been found to exhibit slow growth in this river reach. Close scrutiny will be kept on the rivers roach population via match returns and angler reports until the next survey cycle can confirm whether the perceived downturn in stocks was due to reduced survey efficiency or not. Chub: Chub were sub dominant by standing crop in 2017 (secondary to pike) and were fourth most important species by density. Examination of the five site long-term dataset indicates that the current chub density (0.34 Ind./100m2) remains quite comparable to the previous survey result in 2014 (0.37 Ind./100m2), which in turn was an improvement over the three preceding 2008-2011 surveys. The 2017 density estimate is a little above average when compared to the last 10 years, however when the larger dataset (since 1988) is included then the 2017 result is around half of the species long-term average (0.68 Ind./100m2). In 2017, chub density was greatest at Newport Pagnell and lowest at Clifton Reynes, a distribution of stock that is most likely due to habitat availability at site level, more specifically the absence of overhead cover at Clifton Reynes compared to the intermittent shading present at Newport Pagnell. Chub have a very close affinity to cover; all anglers know the importance of habitat such as low hanging tree boughs, overhanging bushes, undercut banks and accumulations of floating debris when selecting a likely chub haunt. Figure 12: Long-term chub density (>99mm)

It is not possible to comment on the habitat present or river conditions during the historic surveys; such information was not routinely collected, but it is possible to say that some of our sites currently appear to offer little in terms of fish holding structure, particularly when the water is clear. A recent walkover of the some routine sites sampled revealed habitat much more attractive to fish stocks was often present nearby and, from an angling perspective, it is fair to say that some of the routine survey areas would scarcely get a second look whilst walking past to better looking feature swims. The 2006 survey gave an interesting result, also apparent as a strong survey year in the roach dataset, density estimates of both chub and roach were steadily increasing since the 1998 floods ‘washout’ and, in terms of chub the population had higher representation from a wider range of fish lengths than had been seen previously, or indeed since. Following the 2007 summer flooding chub density fell once more and has not returned to comparable densities. 2010 was the last instance where large numbers of juvenile fish were captured, however, despite this apparent dearth of juvenile chub in recent surveys, the species still appears to be regularly encountered in matches, perhaps suggesting that our sites are not necessarily preferred habitats for younger fish. Length frequency data indicates that a greater number of large fish (>400mm) were captured in 2017 than captured in the last two survey cycles. When compared to the long-term dataset, the number of larger fish recorded is a little below average; this figure having been strongly influenced by large aggregations recorded at Oakley and Turvey in the past. Scale samples collected in 2017 determined that chub were displaying average growth rates with a percentage standard growth (PSG) of 102%, which suggests that chub are fully utilising the food resource available to them. Age analysis determined that the chub captured had a maximum age of 14 years old.

www.gov.uk/environment-agency 16 of 26

Figure 12a: Long-term chub density (>99mm) at site level

Figure 12b: Numbers of chub by length band at site level

Barbel: Seven of the eight barbel caught in 2017 were recorded at Newport Pagnell and all of the barbel were small individuals to 365mm long and a maximum age of 4+ years old. Scale reading showed that the barbel were displaying average growth rates with a PSG of 104%. The stability of this popular species’ population has been a matter concern to EA fisheries officers and the community of anglers that this species garners for some time now. The EA has tried to supplement stocks and reinvigorate the fishery by the annual introduction of juvenile fish, however although the species was still occasionally captured it was increasingly apparent from survey data and fishery performance that the species was struggling. Although it was possible to suggest pressures that may have been influencing the population it was not possible to provide any definitive and convincing reason for the decline in stocks. Insufficient barbel were caught in surveys to draw any significant conclusions about why the loss was occurring, although sporadic representation by juvenile fish recorded led to the suspicion that barbel were not recruiting. EA fisheries reports had previously emphasised that excess sediment in the Great Ouse system was likely to be a factor impeding barbel populations and this had led to F.B.G staff managing a programme of gravel cleansing and replenishment to try to boost the species spawning success. Without successful recruitment to maintain stocks and replace fish naturally lost to old age and predation, population loss would be inevitable. To further understand the Great Ouse barbel population the EA funded two PhD students (2009-2013 Dr Karen Twine- Hull International Fisheries Institute, and 2012-2017 Tea Basic – Bournemouth University) to examine the barbel fishery in detail. The most recent PhD (Basic) highlighted two main causes for the reduced levels of juvenile production observed. Firstly, the study found that subsurface sediments within the Ouse contained significant amounts of sand. Laboratory experiments subsequently found that a 30-40% sediment load would encourage a large proportion of the barbel fry to leave the gravel prematurely and incapable of surviving in the wider river environment (i.e. un-swimming and blind). The second finding was that there was no observable recruitment from fish stocked by the EA to bolster the species population. This conclusion was reached following DNA analysis of scale samples. Fish stocked by the EA have DNA markers that denote River Trent origin, whilst the ‘resident population’ themselves descendants of an introduced fish

www.gov.uk/environment-agency 17 of 26

will have DNA that reveals their River Kennet source. This means that stocking, in its current form, is for anglers benefit only, and seems unlikely to lead to a stable and self-sustaining population. This also means that the remaining ‘resident’ population, which is spawning, albeit with low survival rates, is inherently more precious. A significant source of sediment in the Great Ouse and its tributaries is due to the presence of signal crayfish, this species burrowing and foraging activity is constantly releasing sediment and mobilising fine silts. Unfortunately, now that this this destructive and invasive species is firmly established in the Great Ouse, little can be done to remove it effectively. However, other actions can be undertaken to help reduce sediment levels and everyone can play a part in helping to tackle this diffuse and pervasive pressure. Several proactive angling clubs have already been visited by EA staff to demonstrate gravel-jetting apparatus that the club can then borrow to clean spawning gravels on their river lengths. Anglers can also help to identify & address sources of sediment and carry out simple habitat enhancement work alongside the EA, report barbel catches and help us to identify spawning areas and other important habitats. Figure 13: Long-term barbel density (>99mm)

Figure 13a: Long-term barbel density (>99mm) at site level

Figure 13b: Numbers of barbel by length band

www.gov.uk/environment-agency 18 of 26

The Angling Match Catch Database: Updated in 2019 using the data from matches fished on the Great Ouse during 2018. Angler catches by rod and line are a valuable source of information on fishery performance and can be a sound indicator on the status of the exploited stock. The EA’s Angling Match Catch Database allows the storage of match results and permits easy analysis of catches over time. The data provided by anglers not only underpins and validates our routine survey data but also adds to it by occasionally including details of species that may not have been caught in our surveys. The Match Catch database is also an excellent way for anglers to support their fishery and have their say on the quality of sport they are experiencing. By collecting & providing the EA with match returns a club can also know that if it has a concern about fishery performance, there will be a long term record against which this may be compared. Use of Match Catch Data in this report shows the value of angler-derived data to validate results from our routine sampling. Density estimates derived from the 2017 survey initially suggested a fall in the rivers roach population; however, this loss was not substantiated as a similarly severe reduction in fishery performance; and instead, feedback was received that anglers were still experiencing some good sport with silver fish. Figure 14 (right) displays output from the Match Catch Database and details matches fished on the Great Ouse between Newport Pagnell and Bedford length over the past 14 years. Fishery performance is expressed as the average total weight caught per angler (g) and as the average weight caught per angler/hour fished (g). The dataset shows that whilst 2017 fishery performance was a little down on the preceding two years, catch rates remained above average and results were closely comparable to those reported in 2006, when electric fishing survey derived population estimates were far higher. More recent match returns show that the downturn in sport was not long-term and fishery performance during 2018 has subsequently gone on to exceed all previous years where match catch data has been supplied. The average catch in 2018 matches equated to 476g per hour fished with an average total catch of 2381g per angler. Figure 14a shows that the number of anglers fishing the matches fell between 2015 and 2017, although participation remained above average and even with the reduced fishery performance experienced, anglers who did participate had an above average success rate of around 70%. Catch returns supplied in 2018 have shown significant increase in both angler participation and fishery performance; recording 375 ‘angler days’ spent taking part in the seventeen matches from which data was supplied. This was the highest number of anglers fishing these matches since our records began, and almost 90% of anglers participating succeeding in ‘weighing in’.

www.gov.uk/environment-agency 19 of 26

Feedback provided with match returns often mentioned fishery performance on the day of the match being influenced by river conditions, particularly by turbidity and light levels. Match anglers are, in many respects, faced with very similar difficulties as the EA’s survey team, namely they cannot choose where to fish and cannot pick ideal conditions; they must catch what is available in the river length allocated to them on the day. However, this is obviously further complicated for anglers who must also contend with the possibility of fish actually being present, but not feeding with any enthusiasm! Species composition: Examination of all data from the 138 matches fished since 2004 shows that bleak were considered the most numerous species on 62 occasions (44%) and noted on 84% of catch returns. Roach were judged to have been the major species in 30% of matches, were second most numerous on 36% of returns and encountered in 93% of matches fished. Dace were the third most important species, being considered numerically dominant in 17% of matches fished secondary in 35% and noted present on 84% of returns. Perch were encountered in 95% of matches (and dominant in eight) with some large individual fish >3lb captured, whilst chub were recorded on 55% of returns and were considered the most prevalent species on three occasions. Common bream were judged most numerous in just one match but were represented on around 50% of returns and tench were caught with surprising regularity, being notable captures in some 45% of matches. Figure 15: Species composition by estimated number (No. of matches) Of course, these species composition figures are Species Princial No. Subdominant No. Also present estimates drawn from general observations, Bleak 62 19 18 however the dominance of roach, dace, perch Roach 41 51 37 and chub does seem appropriate for the river, Dace 24 49 44 and the ponded nature of the site from where a Perch 8 10 114 proportion of the data-set is derived would Chub 3 2 72 perhaps explain the inclusion of bleak, common Bream 1 2 66 bream and tench. Tench - - 63 Gudgeon - - 15 These returns show that, when conditions are Ruffe - - 14 right, the Great Ouse retains the ability to provide some very good sport. A good example Rudd - - 1 is a match report from Olney and Clifton’s ‘Bathing Place’ fishery in December 2017 that detailed almost 130 lbs of silver fish caught by just 14 anglers. The additional 2018 match results do appear to support the notion that the results from our 2017 electric-fishing surveys were influenced by high river clarity at the time of survey, the downturn observed in fishery performance during 2017 also perhaps reflecting increased difficulty experienced by anglers during this period. The subsequent 2018 data shows increased angler success and considerably higher weights caught, both of which indicate that the population estimates of shoaling species, and particularly roach, derived from the 2017 survey programme are unlikely to be a true reflection of the rivers current population. This dataset and is derived principally from data kindly provided by Olney and Clifton Fishing Association http://www.olneyfishing.co.uk If other angling clubs fishing the Great Ouse wish to provide match data for analysis and inclusion in subsequent reports then this is encouraged and will be welcomed. A blank match return form is included at the rear of this report.

www.gov.uk/environment-agency 20 of 26

Non-native species Signal crayfish are widespread throughout the River Great Ouse and the detrimental effect of this species on a rivers ecology is well known. This may be through competition for food, direct predation of fish eggs and fry and by mobilisation of sediment by foraging and causing bank collapses when burrowing. It is possible that the slow growth rates exhibited by roach and dace are at least partly due to increased competition from this species. Chub, which are quite capable of eating even moderately sized adult crayfish are faring better and showing average growth. Perch also prey on the younger life stages of crayfish and although growth analysis was not conducted on this species, they were present to a large size. Another non-native species noted was the plant Himalayan Balsam Impatiens glandulifera. When established this plant can quickly dominate and shades out native species completely changing the appearance of riverbanks with its large attractive flowers. When the shallow rooted plant dies back during the winter months it leaves riverbanks bare which may then be susceptible to increased erosion. When excess sediment enters a river channel from sources such as bank erosion, cattle poaching and crayfish activity, the increased fine sediment load may infiltrate or smother the important gravel substrate. Overlaying sediment may stop fish from using these areas, whilst sediment accumulation amongst the gravel will reduce through flow of oxygenated water to eggs, preventing development. Reducing sediment input and infiltration and keeping key gravel areas clean can therefore help contribute to increased productivity of the river and help improve fish populations in the local area. The invasive shrimp Dikerogammarus haemobaphes has been found in the Rivers Tove and Ouzel, and is thought to have colonised these via the Grand Union Canal over spillways. The shrimp has subsequently migrated down these tributaries and into the Great Ouse. In an attempt to prevent upstream migration of this invasive shrimp a baffle was constructed on the crest of Wolverton Weir, a structure that would otherwise have been easily surmountable for this species. It is very important that the spread of this species be controlled as it can have significant impacts on the native invertebrate ecology. A single zander was caught at Newport Pagnell and this is currently the upper-most limit of this species in the Great Ouse. The fish was almost certainly an escapee from the nearby Grand Union Canal. Anglers can help stop the spread of invasive non-native species by using the check, clean & dry protocol, details of which are included at the back of this report or by visiting: http://www.nonnativespecies.org/checkcleandry/biosecurity-for-anglers.cfm Owners of smartphones could also help track the location of non-native species by using the Plant tracker App available for both Android and iPhone. Habitat projects Project 1: Off-river fry refuge on the Great Ouse below Harrold Road Bridge. Kye Jerrom Target species for this project: Barbel  Re-instate a relic side channel on the left bank of the Great Ouse below Harrold Road Bridge. The feature would link to the river during all flow/level periods and provide valuable habitat for fish, birds, amphibians and reptiles.  Formalisation of a cattle drink and the provision of a dog run. – The feature would reduce erosion and sediment issues by installing rock features, reduce gradient of the bank to reduce the impact of poaching and erosion. The feature will also provide for flow refuge for all fish species. Outcomes: Barbel populations are struggling on the Great Ouse and investigations point to fry survival and reduced spawning success as the primary causes. The Environment Agency have appraised options to reverse the trend, these include, back channel creation (for fry refuge), improving spawning habitat and predation (crayfish) control. Back channel construction and cattle drink creation, improves refugia habitat for all juvenile fish, especially barbel and this project

www.gov.uk/environment-agency 21 of 26

will improve spawning success and promote sustainability of the species. Barbel are known to spawn above and below Harrold Road Bridge so this is the ideal location for fry to take refuge. Delivery of this combined project will counter current impacts that include sedimentation, crayfish predation and fry wash out caused by flood events. Off-channel refugia are characterised by low energy flows that can be used by juvenile fish and fish, under high flows. Relevant habitats include back channels or small drainage ditches that connect to the main channel. Creation of off- channel refuges should be encouraged, particularly downstream of spawning habitats where juvenile fish can reside post-emergence. Off-channel habitats are created through, for example, reconnecting old ditches/channels to the main rivers or enlarging old cattle drinks. Project 2: Ravenstone Sluice Trial – Main sluice gate Ellis Selway Target species for this project: All fish species Studies commissioned by the Environment Agency concluded that none of the gates (the radial sluice, engine house sluice and mill sluice) were needed for flood risk management purposes. As owners of the structures, we are obliged to look at our responsibilities under the Water Framework Directive and Eel Regulations particularly in relation to the passage of fish and eels, and the natural functioning of the river. The radial gate sluice at the Ravenstone complex was opened on the 15th September to investigate the potential benefits of re-establishing the natural functioning of the river at this location. In summary, the results of the trial have been:  Modelled water level adjustments were accurate with no negative ecological or geomorphological adjustments recorded.  Fish and eel passage remains limited due to high flow velocities and head difference, the opening of the radial gate sluice is likely to have enabled free movement of stronger species. The EA is currently investigating full decommissioning of the structures alongside permanent free passage for fish and eels. Preferably, this would be bypassing the structure to remove the upstream impoundment of water and re- establish natural flow and habitat diversity. Summary conclusions The 2017 survey of the Great Ouse was undertaken during challenging survey conditions and produced disappointing results. The low-density estimate derived is primarily due to a reduction in the number of roach captured. Output from the Angling match Catch Database suggests that while fishery performance has suffered a little, silver fish populations are unlikely to be as poor as the current survey result suggests. The status of the Great Ouse barbel population is a different matter, but recent findings have provided a much greater insight into the species plight within the Great Ouse catchment. Fisheries staff are currently determining what further actions can be undertaken to assist the species, based on the findings of the most recent PhD work. Telemetry based sediment monitoring has already been established in two key locations, output from this investigation will be included in subsequent reports.

Justin Mould Analysis and Reporting (Fish) Next survey due:

Summer 2020

www.gov.uk/environment-agency 22 of 26

Match catch

If any angling matches are held throughout this river length then angling clubs are encouraged to provide match results to feed into the Environment Agencies Match Catch Database which analyses angler catches to assess fishery performance. The output of this database can also be used as supporting evidence to assist analysis of routine survey results. Match return cards and more information on the Match Catch Database can be obtained from Fisheries Officer Chris Middleton. [email protected] Anglers can keep up to date with the Great Ouse & Fenland Fisheries Team by liking and following our social media pages @OuseFishEA:

Facebook: please click here. Twitter: please click here.

Anglers can also keep up to date with the Lower Ouse & Fenland Fisheries Consultative Association (LOFFCA) and local Angling Trust Eastern Region by liking the following Facebook pages:

Lower Ouse & Fenland Fisheries Consultative Association (LOFFCA): please click here. Angling Trust East of England: please click here.

Before you go fishing don’t forget:

Environment Agency rod licence and permission from the fishery owner;

fisheries byelaws;

Wales but not most stillwaters. Stillwater fishery owners can still have their own close season and rules, so please check with them before setting out.

Report illegal fishing:

If you see any fishing, netting or trapping you think may be illegal, please do not tackle it yourself. Call us immediately on 0800 80 70 60 and tell us: Exactly where the alleged offence is taking place; What is happening; How many people are involved and their descriptions & The registration numbers of any vehicles involved.

If you prefer to remain report an environmental crime anonymously call Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111 or https://crimestoppers-uk.org/give-information/give-information-online/.

www.gov.uk/environment-agency 23 of 26

Environment Agency Match Record (Please complete after each match and return by email to [email protected])

Name of angling club: Date of match:

River: Venue:

Section / peg fished: Number of competitors:

Match start time: Match duration (hrs):

Number of anglers weighing-in:

Total weight caught: (lbs/oz) or (g) delete as appropriate

Winning weight: (lbs/oz) or (g) delete as appropriate

2nd weight: (lbs/oz) or (g) delete as appropriate

3rd weight: (lbs/oz) or (g) delete as appropriate

Species Caught In: Greatest number:

Second greatest number:

Other species present:

River Conditions:

Level Colour Condition River Temp

Low Clear Falling Cold

Normal Coloured Steady Normal

High Green Rising Warm

Weather Conditions:

Brightness Wind Rain

Dull Still Dry

Changeable Light Drizzle

Bright Moderate Light

Strong Heavy

Hail

Sleet

Snow

Any other comments:

www.gov.uk/environment-agency 24 of 26

Appendix: Figures 11- 14: Growth rate graphs for key species

www.gov.uk/environment-agency 25 of 26

www.gov.uk/environment-agency 26 of 26