• 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...

Angling Times otter article

Graham Elliott said:
I certainly realise how lucky I have been over the years regarding the numbers and quality of barbel that I have seen in most of my rivers.

From the times in the very early '60's when to many they were considered so rare that hardly that many fished for them.

It will be a long time if ever till the fantastic days of the 1970 through to, say 2010 come again
Click to expand...
Fascinating thread that i have just picked up on...Graham has alluded to a point I was going to make. I wonder how many of us would have caught a double figure barbel if we had been fishing in the 1950's, very few I suspect because...well there may have not been that many but why? A number of us have been fortunate enough to live through a barbel explosion, with some fish reaching a size that if it were human would be classified as obese. It is not surprising, therefore that barbel, like carp, are an appropriate and relatively easy food source for such a predator. If there is an apex predator in the system it is bound to have an impact there is no question about this but over time an equilibrium will be reached but there will be fluctuations; simply though this will mean less barbel.

It is obviously heresy to say this on here but maybe the apparent dominance of barbel on many rivers is actually sign of an ecosystem out of kilter and there needs to be balance of all species at the different trophic levels. I do not know, and there is not that much science it seems on what the climax community of a river actually looks like.

Slightly less serious, do otters eat bream as i would have thought they were also relatively an easy capture but no one ever seems to mention this...are barbel easy prey as they are generally bottom dwellers that can be attacked from behind?
 
I for one agree with that Paul, and see it as far from heretical. What gets me is some anglers refuse to even contemplate that otters have played a part (any part) in the reduction of barbel numbers, with some anglers even believing that the barbel are just hiding.

N.b.. I don't think even otters like bream Paul 😂
 
Y
Paul Dowgill said:
Fascinating thread that i have just picked up on...Graham has alluded to a point I was going to make. I wonder how many of us would have caught a double figure barbel if we had been fishing in the 1950's, very few I suspect because...well there may have not been that many but why? A number of us have been fortunate enough to live through a barbel explosion, with some fish reaching a size that if it were human would be classified as obese. It is not surprising, therefore that barbel, like carp, are an appropriate and relatively easy food source for such a predator. If there is an apex predator in the system it is bound to have an impact there is no question about this but over time an equilibrium will be reached but there will be fluctuations; simply though this will mean less barbel.

It is obviously heresy to say this on here but maybe the apparent dominance of barbel on many rivers is actually sign of an ecosystem out of kilter and there needs to be balance of all species at the different trophic levels. I do not know, and there is not that much science it seems on what the climax community of a river actually looks like.

Slightly less serious, do otters eat bream as i would have thought they were also relatively an easy capture but no one ever seems to mention this...are barbel easy prey as they are generally bottom dwellers that can be attacked from behind?
Click to expand...
Cheers Paul.
As you know my angling is much more diverse than just barbel, even more so now days.

Just popped to a lake a few miles from us where chap had a 2.1 roach last week. ( I will have some of that!)

What I do remember, especially in the mid 60's to 70's is the number of people that boasted of being "smashed up" multiple times.

On rivers it was normal to fish light lines, especially in matches. Anything above 3.2bs was for heathens.
Later it become normal to target them with 6lb and above. And still increasing, hence larger fish being caught.

One must remember the original long standing
H Avon record fish at the time were All? ( I believe) Caught while Salmon fishing with "Proper" gear.
 
It's not that some people perceive that the otters are not an issue in having taken some barbel, it is that some people perceive them to be the only problem, and the only problem everywhere! So emotional are some people regarding this that they will not accept others views in disagreeing with them the extent to which they have an effect.
Each and every river has it's own biodiversity dynamics depending on a whole manner of things at a local level. It is lunacy to suggest otherwise as some have and do. The first thing I think about objectively when I read the words of those espousing such simplistic views is 'you are going to complain about the supposed introduction of a species taking too many of the fish after which you fish, which have been introduced themselves'.
You hold absolutely no high ground in your argument whatsoever and I guarantee large swathes of the public would immediately, as is the case nowadays, identify every angler as a self-serving individual capable of only considering their own little narrow-minded view.
I heard on the radio the other day a program on the interest in providing cleaner water in rivers and lakes for leisure use - it was stated for the use of paddle boarders, kayakers and swimmers. You might imagine easily where the battle lines have and will be drawn in the future in such debates and it shouldn't take much to consider that you should want to be in a good position as guardians of this country's waterways and everything that lives in them to stand you in good stead, not just that you are not catching big barbel anymore!
 
Damian Kimmins said:
It's not that some people perceive that the otters are not an issue in having taken some barbel, it is that some people perceive them to be the only problem, and the only problem everywhere! So emotional are some people regarding this that they will not accept others views in disagreeing with them the extent to which they have an effect.
Each and every river has it's own biodiversity dynamics depending on a whole manner of things at a local level. It is lunacy to suggest otherwise as some have and do. The first thing I think about objectively when I read the words of those espousing such simplistic views is 'you are going to complain about the supposed introduction of a species taking too many of the fish after which you fish, which have been introduced themselves'.
You hold absolutely no high ground in your argument whatsoever and I guarantee large swathes of the public would immediately, as is the case nowadays, identify every angler as a self-serving individual capable of only considering their own little narrow-minded view.
I heard on the radio the other day a program on the interest in providing cleaner water in rivers and lakes for leisure use - it was stated for the use of paddle boarders, kayakers and swimmers. You might imagine easily where the battle lines have and will be drawn in the future in such debates and it shouldn't take much to consider that you should want to be in a good position as guardians of this country's waterways and everything that lives in them to stand you in good stead, not just that you are not catching big barbel anymore!
Click to expand...
Much of what you write is true Damian, in my opinion. There are individuals out there that do see the demise of barbel as entirely due to otters. Facebook is full of such single-issue 'knuckle-draggers', but I don't believe there are such posters on this forum. That said ....
The OP was entitled "Angling Times Otter Article", not "What has caused the destruction of the barbel population?", but it would appear that the only contribution some posters are willing to make is "Ah but what about this? What about that". And to my mind that is underhanded avoidance of the fact that otters have totally wiped out the population of some small/medium sized rivers. Personally I believe that if those rivers had been full of lush streamer weed then those otters may have stood a much better chance, so yes ... it's not just an otter problem IMO.
I believe that most of those that you label as having "their own little narrow-minded view" simply want the 'powers that be' to recognise that there is a problem, and that otters are a part of that problem. Yes there are some oafs on Facebook etc demanding a cull, but on here? On this thread? No Damian, they are not ... and those on here that do actually admit to recognising that otters as part of the problem do not, in my considered opinion, appear to be occupying any "high ground". The very opposite would appear to be true. Again, in my opinion.
Play the ball, not the man.
 
Terry Simner said:
Much of what you write is true Damian, in my opinion. There are individuals out there that do see the demise of barbel as entirely due to otters. Facebook is full of such single-issue 'knuckle-draggers', but I don't believe there are such posters on this forum. That said ....
The OP was entitled "Angling Times Otter Article", not "What has caused the destruction of the barbel population?", but it would appear that the only contribution some posters are willing to make is "Ah but what about this? What about that". And to my mind that is underhanded avoidance of the fact that otters have totally wiped out the population of some small/medium sized rivers. Personally I believe that if those rivers had been full of lush streamer weed then those otters may have stood a much better chance, so yes ... it's not just an otter problem IMO.
I believe that most of those that you label as having "their own little narrow-minded view" simply want the 'powers that be' to recognise that there is a problem, and that otters are a part of that problem. Yes there are some oafs on Facebook etc demanding a cull, but on here? On this thread? No Damian, they are not ... and those on here that do actually admit to recognising that otters as part of the problem do not, in my considered opinion, appear to be occupying any "high ground". The very opposite would appear to be true. Again, in my opinion.
Play the ball, not the man.
Click to expand...
Very good explanation Terry. Some people assume pointing out the damage otters have done to the smaller rivers is automatically demanding a cull. It isn't. It's being honest and not afraid to speak the truth, however unpalatable "the public" or otter lovers find it. Some do refuse to admit there are other factors responsible, i.e. the general poor health of our rivers. Similarly, those who only blame anything but the otter also need to remove their blinkers. Many factors have caused the decline of barbel and other species and it's getting us nowhere to blame one factor and conveniently ignore others.
 
Joe Winstanley said:
Do you believe them Lawrence?
Click to expand...
The thing is Joe, its irrelevant what i believe to be honest, i stick to the facts, and the fact is otters have made significant negative impacts on all the barbel populations on the rivers they share with barbel, I can't take every problem on, but what I do know is that even if we did have the cleanest of barbel rivers, we would still have an otter problem, cleaner rivers with no barbel...not a pleasant thought.
 
Lawrence Breakspear said:
The thing is Joe, its irrelevant what i believe to be honest, i stick to the facts, and the fact is otters have made significant negative impacts on all the barbel populations on the rivers they share with barbel, I can't take every problem on, but what I do know is that even if we did have the cleanest of barbel rivers, we would still have an otter problem, cleaner rivers with no barbel...not a pleasant thought.
Click to expand...

I think given all the pressures our rivers face I'm not sure we will ever return to a situation when our rivers are genuinely chemically and biological clean. It's a sad thought.
 
Just a brief observation. Although the Trent now seems to have a thriving barbel population compared to when I first fished it in the early 80's. It has always had chemical pollutants, in one form or another, pumped into it via the many sewerage treatment plants along its length. It's hardly surprising, as many major towns and cities in the Midlands, have tributaries that eventually end up in the Trent. To this day you can smell detergents and cleaning agents when standing at any of the weirs on the non-tidal stretches. Despite the chemicals (albeit in probable low concentrations) entering the system, there is still a good stock of many specimen grade fish be it chub, barbel, pike or zander. However, there doesn't appear to be many otters present. I certainly haven't seen any on the Trent, and I tend to fish the quieter stretches, both day and at night.
 
Lawrence Breakspear said:
www.theguardian.com

Otters are back – in every county in England

Return of otter shows English rivers are healthiest for 20 years, says Environment Agency
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com

According to the EA and the Guardian the reason for the otters return to our rivers on a national scale, is because the rivers are so clean, the cleanest in 20 years...
Click to expand...
Depends which rivers they mean. The Cherwell is mostly a muddy ditch through an average summer now. Stretches such as Heyford and Somerton used to have strong flows over thick beds of streamer weeds. Now they are running at half the flow/volume & are murky and lifeless. So the EA must have turned a blind eye to the Cherwell when doing this report. For the past 10 years more or less it's been like this, a once excellent little barbel and chub river now almost completely finished.
 
Lawrence Breakspear said:
The thing is Joe, its irrelevant what i believe to be honest, i stick to the facts, and the fact is otters have made significant negative impacts on all the barbel populations on the rivers they share with barbel, I can't take every problem on, but what I do know is that even if we did have the cleanest of barbel rivers, we would still have an otter problem, cleaner rivers with no barbel...not a pleasant thought.
Click to expand...

Alarmist nonsense about which you have absolutely no proof whatsoever!
 
Damian Kimmins said:
Alarmist nonsense about which you have absolutely no proof whatsoever!
Click to expand...
None of us have any proof of our opinions Damian when speculating "what if?". That doesn't make Lawrence wrong because we don't have the cleanest of rivers to put it to the test. My opinion is somewhere in between. Clean rivers would probably help barbel recruitment/survival rates but I doubt it would prevent some impact from otters. But that's my opinion only.
 
Alex Gowney said:
None of us have any proof of our opinions Damian when speculating "what if?". That doesn't make Lawrence wrong because we don't have the cleanest of rivers to put it to the test. My opinion is somewhere in between. Clean rivers would probably help barbel recruitment/survival rates but I doubt it would prevent some impact from otters. But that's my opinion only.
Click to expand...
It makes Lawrence very wrong, Alex, on the rather fundamental point that he states those as being facts!
It shouldn't need to be pointed out what a fact is!
Like I say, pure emotional drivel!
 
There is a significant change in the type of posts Damian has made over the past few months.

All those exclamation marks. And no Eastern influences.

Just saying.
 
Ady Brayshaw said:
Just a brief observation. Although the Trent now seems to have a thriving barbel population compared to when I first fished it in the early 80's. It has always had chemical pollutants, in one form or another, pumped into it via the many sewerage treatment plants along its length. It's hardly surprising, as many major towns and cities in the Midlands, have tributaries that eventually end up in the Trent. To this day you can smell detergents and cleaning agents when standing at any of the weirs on the non-tidal stretches. Despite the chemicals (albeit in probable low concentrations) entering the system, there is still a good stock of many specimen grade fish be it chub, barbel, pike or zander. However, there doesn't appear to be many otters present. I certainly haven't seen any on the Trent, and I tend to fish the quieter stretches, both day and at night.
Click to expand...
I am not sure that you are smelling Chemical pollutants Ady. The only chemical I know to used in waste water treatment are flocculants (mainly ferric chloride). I think what you are smelling may be bacteria harnessed in the breakdown of mater during the treatment process. You may smell it on the coast sometimes as it is present there also.
 
Graham Elliott said:
There is a significant change in the type of posts Damian has made over the past few months.

All those exclamation marks. And no Eastern influences.

Just saying.
Click to expand...
In stark contrast to yours then!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top