• 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...

Anglers Mail - John Bailey Article

David Gauntlett said:
Chris...would I be right in saying you have either had a bad day, a bad night....or both :D
Click to expand...

Neither, I just detest the whole otter debate. I can understand the view that all forum debate may well be an exercise in futility, but this particular monster is the creme de la creme. It never dies, no one agrees, regardless of how civil it is, and nothing is going to change. That may not be the case with other issues which aren't quite the sacred cow that the otter is. Cormorants are a prime example. Nearly as much talk as otters garner, the difference being that you can legally do something about them. Of course it helps immensely that they aren't cute and fluffy.
 
and wouldn't it be ironic if pellets were to blame?!

as I write this, two posts are sitting alongside each other on the main forum,
one of them bemoaning the fact that barbel populations are dwindling,
and the other celebrating the fact that 3 16lbers were caught in one session.

both caused by the same thing...
 
Graham Elliott said:
What I am hoping to do is get some ideas that may give potential causes.

Graham
Click to expand...

Graham the only thing that i can think of that you have in your rivers that are not present in mine are Signal Crayfish - for me, these must be the main reason why you have such poor fry recruitment, i.e. the fry never hatch in the first place because the eggs are eaten. You have the spawning grounds, you have some adults left so they must breed. Admitedly there are not many Perch, but tons of trout which would fill that gap and eat plenty of fry.

The idea that pellets are to blame is quite funny, if you consider the fish have ate so much high fat food, got lazy and can't be bothered to breed anymore!
 
Ian Crook said:
Bravo John, Finally, someone has published an opinion, based on very solid scientific facts and research similar to that which I have been arguing on here now for 4 years that Barbel are still there in our rivers in the same sort of numbers they have been for decades, they have just become wiser, more survival concious and hence harder to catch............ Oh, and the chub too............ Thank you Mr. Bailey.
Click to expand...

The fact that the EA/NRA have re-stocked probably tens of millions of barbel and other species into our ailing rivers for the last 20+ years, to aid and maintain the survival of species in UK rivers.... must be taken into consideration also...but is it!

What would our rivers be like today without any re-stocking and continued re-stocking? Err..not a lot i think!
 
Last edited:
It was somewhat proved in an experiment by Sparsholt College on carp a while ago with high oiled pellet v low oiled pellet. Seems to destroy/damage the internal organs thus ultimately shortening life span when feeding the high oiled to cyprinid species. Also using pellet in winter, cold water conditions, the pellets are not broken down by the fish as quickly and can rupture the stomach or intestine. The fish has to take on more water to try and break them down and they stay in the system longer. This can also cause the pellets to 'ferment' in the organs, thus causing gassing up and swim bladder problems...and can kill the fish.
 
Last edited:
Andrew Boyne said:
I'm not insensitive to the issues facing your rivers Dave, - i might come across that way but it is not my intention. My opinion is based upon what i see, read and hear about - just like you.

During the late 90's i was constantly being told by match anglers that the Trent was dead - i sat behind Mr Nudd during the European Champs on the vicky when very few managed to weigh anything in - Kevin Ashurst managed to win it for us with a roach fry that wouldn't even register on most of our scales. The Trent is dead they all claimed. Later that day i dropped on to Nuddy's peg, C11 if i remember right and had a dozen bream from 6-9lb and 3 barbel in the 8lb class in just a copule of hours. It wasn't dead - the fish didn't want to feed with 13m of carbon hanging over their heads and several hundred people lining the banks. I won't mention that french bloke sticking his thumb and forefinger through a breams eye sockets - ooops, just did!

Since then there has been a major revival in the roach population, as i mentioned earlier - how do you explain that if otters and cormorants have had their way? They were to blame a decade ago - yet things have have changed and now they are not mentioned. You're looking for scapegoats and finding a few, instead of looking at the bigger picture. If otters do wipe out your little river it may take 8-10 years for the young fish to replenish the stocks - if you have no young fish it may take a lot longer - it may never recover - the major problem, yet again being the lack of recruitment not the predator.

I've said it before but anglers complaining about otters/cormorants is doing us no favours - alienating ourselves from the wider community which would otherwise stand with us and help us in our fight. Taking that stance is only a step away from lobbing pike up the bank and i think we've all moved on from that, at least i hope we have.

Lastly - i've absolutely no interest in commercial fisheries or their plight - if the owners can't find enough money to employ a few local guns to protect their valuable stocks then they are obviously not charging enough!
Click to expand...

Andrew,

Now that's what I call a spot on post........
 
Graham Elliott said:
I'm just pleased that Richard H also agrees that a very significant number of anglers (he says 90%) are not catching barbel as they were.
Graham
Click to expand...

Graham,

You either do not understand my post or you have your tongue firmly in your cheek. I prefer to think it is the latter. However I am truly amazed that my throwaway comment that "10% of the anglers catch 90% of the fish" has ruffles so many feathers. As soon as I get a moment I am going to expand on this on a separate thread.......I bet you all cant wait.............
 
I'm not sure about 90/10; 80/20 is the figure most often used.
Known as the Pareto principle it crops (pun intended*)up all over the place.

*Among other things Pareto observed that 20% of pea pods in his garden produced 80% of the peas.
 
Adrian Williams said:
I'm not sure about 90/10; 80/20 is the figure most often used.
Known as the Pareto principle it crops (pun intended*)up all over the place.

*Among other things Pareto observed that 20% of pea pods in his garden produced 80% of the peas.
Click to expand...

I have a horrid feeling this guy is going to come up with a lot of those pareto theories Ade...if that's the correct spelling? Looks a bit wrong to me :D

Cheers, Dave.
 
Richard. What you actually said was

"I can assure you that the 10% are catching as many fish as they ever have"

Following my comment about the vast majority (90%) on the Kennet and Loddon not catching anything like before. That seemed pretty similar to me.:D

Which is very different than your subsequent post that 10% of anglers catch 90% of the fish............................;) If they are using the shoe principal maybe but..

I would put it at 30/70 :rolleyes:


Andrew Boynes post re crayfish is definately something that should be looked at very seriously IMO and has been raised in postings before.
 
Last edited:
It's no secret that a certain stretch of the Dove holds half a dozen well documented large barbel and has done for several years. What is less well known is the fact that the same stretch is home to al least one otter.
I have no idea what it's eating but it ain't the big residents that's for sure.

Edit, the Pareto principle seems to hold there as well, I seem to catch 80% of the times I visit but I know allot of people blank far more often than they catch, Having said that it's 100 mile round trip for me so I tend to only go if the conditions are spot on whereas those who live closer are more likely to chance it when conditions are less than ideal. That doesnt make me better it just means I have more time available and can be choosy.

PS, I think the spelling is right Dave, I couldn't remember his name and had to google.
 
Last edited:
Graham - there's going to have to be some form of biological warfare to get rid of the signals, no other method will work imo. The EA will have to find a parasite or something that attacks and kills only them then release it en masse. Is it possible? I don't know but i hope so. You might have to put up with 'average' 5lb chub and 2lb perch like us northerners after they've gone though . . .
 
Oh bugger! Still, my pb chub will probably go up in the next few years! Just had a quick scan, will have a good read of it later. I had herd they were in some of the yorkshire rivers i fish, but not seen one as yet.
 
I appreciate that this post has focused on otter predation or not and has made the odd reference to cormorants. Close to where I live is a lake. In the middle of the lake is a small island with a barren tree. On the tree roosts 42 cormorants that's 42lb of fish a day, 294lb a week, 1176lb a month. That is not sutainable. Some of these fish that are being consumed are 4oz perch, how long does it take for these perch to grow to this size? I just can't see how this level of predation can be brushed under the carpet. Chuck in an otter and a couple of EEs and what is left is a lovely boating lake. Next thing that will be peddled about is that the EEs have no impact on our fisheries, even, how they might somehow benefit our waters, tell that to those who fish the Fenland Waters. I suspect a similar case to otter predation on the smaller rivers.
 
Been watching this develop over the weekend but had neither the time nor motivation to comment really.

I started this thread to get minds whirring and in some cases that has happened, in many (as I also expected from particular individuals), it has just provided another thread on which to vent their own thoughts which have not and probably never will change no matter what evidence is presented.

I would say that those who decided to slur Karen with point like "she lied because she wanted to work for the EA" or such should hang their heads in shame. Regards what is in black and white, I agree it is not great detail but it is slides for a presentation, as anyone who presents will know, the slides are just punch points and the talking and discussion is where you convey information. I met with Karen and had her present her facts and take lots of questions and discussion, I was left in absolutely no doubt that what she presented was factual.

There are lots of theories out there about reduction of stocks where statements like "it is a known fact", etc.... however, to my knowledge many of the things quoted in this way are far from being known facts, merely hearsay and conjecture which many have accepted as "fact" as it suits their assumptions.

It IS a known fact that the EA have been constantly re-stocking many rivers with many species, my local river Loddon was extensively re-stocked with Barbel in the late 90s, it may well be that recruitment has been extremely poor since then, not non-existent though.........

Someone once told me that a male barbel did not get bigger than about 7lb and therefore all doubles must be female....... someone also once told me that Barbel only grew to about 14lb.......... someone also once told me that male tench did not grow bigger than 3 or 4lbs......
Like everything, time moves on, I have caught male tench over 8lbs, Barbel are being caught at 20lbs or more, why therefore do people still insist that all doubles are female, why can male barbel not now be weighing 10, 11 or even 12lbs??

I try to avoid getting involved in all the theorising to be honest, there is some issue with recruitment, there is some issue with water quality and there is some issue with predation/poaching on the whole. Someone has already said that on a very healthy river system the impact is far less and I agree with this. I am personally involved in lots of work to try to address these issues, to make local waterways healthier and more sustainable, how many of the theorists on here can say the same.

Far too many over opinionated people doing absolutely nothing to fix what they see as problems. Never mind, there are other people willing to give up their time whilst you just go fishing and then complain that you did not catch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top