• 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...

Fish killer - a surprising culprit, you say?

There's too many, you can't let an Apex predator breed and breed with no control, there has to come a point where laws need to be changed, Cormorants can be shot under licence, and that's exactly what should be happening with Otters in the not too distant future.

I see no difference from Otters to Foxes, both belong in the countryside, but both have no natural predators and when this is the case, man needs to control the numbers.

The whole thing about Otters was they were endangered and rightly should have been protected, but being endangered was where their protected status came from, you could never ever say today they are endangered, they are going to become a menace, not just to fish, but birds and other mammals in their environment.

If Foxes can be controlled lawfully, why not Otters.
 
John Walker said:
look at it another way Neil, if you had invested many tens of thousands of £s on stocking fish would you truly have the same veiw as you have now, or if it meant the end of fishing as we know it also would it honestly change your veiw on otters,
i know it would with most people involved with fishing.
Click to expand...

That would depend on whether you thought the needs of man, however arbitrary, were more important than the survival of all other forms of life. At the end of the day you're talking about somebody's job, hardly life or death, if they went out of business due to a rival would you advocate culling them?
It's the kind of attitude that brings us to where we are today in facing potentially the biggest mass extinction since the dinosaurs. But also has led to the rivers being in such a state that they can't support the life they should.
It's a fair enough point that maybe too many otters have been released, though I'm still not convinced that most are not simply from natural repopulation considering nobody has any real evidence to the contrary, but had we not killed them off in the first place or if the rivers were in a fit state then there wouldn't be a problem.
It's only fishing and as much as I love it I'd still rather see otters back and catch less than filling my boots in a sterile, man made environment. I very much doubt it'll be otters that ruin fishing in this country, but we certainly could.
 
The Law will never change regarding Otters..
We have to accept change, we have no choice..
Even the Conservatives with their overwhelming majority, had to re-think about allowing fox hunting to be debated because of public outcry. Imagine if it was the Otter.! Anglers would become Pariahs overnight.!
Accept the fact Otters have more rights than Anglers, that will not change..
Enjoy your fishing and forget about Otters is the best advice I was given by a well known Carp angler..
 
Craig - precisely, even with the majority they have the Tories are not stupid re such issues and will not waste Parliamentary time on hunting never mind otters. The only chance of any change in the law as i see it is if otters begin to do significant damage to farmers' livelihoods and this could only be through disease to livestock a la the badger - there is no evidence of this. So as i and many other on both sides of this debate have said we need to focus on other bigger issues such as water abstraction/river management/invasive species but these of course are far more complex and time consuming, with no solutions as simple as a cull. So in the meantime more and more angers will travel ever increasing distances to fish those few rivers that are apparently still teaming with barbel with of course increasing pressure on these rivers and the impact this has, for example i do wonder how much bait goes in the Trent and Wye and to what effect.
 
The issues regarding predation on natural stillwaters and riverine environments, and managed fisheries are very different. Blurring the 2 doesn't help angling move forward or progress these issues.

Purchased stock and livelihoods are emotive issues but do they and should they concern rivers? Not in my opinion, we are guests of the river and should try and keep them as natural as possible and interfere with them as little as possible also.

But and its a big but (hmmm big butts), we meddle and manage, build weirs, take out bends, put in chemicals, take out weed beds, put in invasive species, take out cover, add flood defences, throw in oily pellet (t.i.c that one!), stock fish, bbq fish et cetera. the list goes on and on.

The issues surrounding each river will be different, there will be no right solution for every area. But anglers should be consulted and be part of any conservation plans for local areas.


Hows about Angling asks the simple question-

When will Otters reach a number where they no longer need protection?

That level needs to be established and then perhaps some sort of predation action plan could be sorted out but untill such number is identified then the debate is stagnant.

From my 'own' rivers point of view, sorting the predation issue is the tip of the ice-berg. Even if the predation issues were sorted then the coffin lid would still well and truly be nailed shut as only the last nail would have been pulled
 
Ash Gould said:
The issues regarding predation on natural stillwaters and riverine environments, and managed fisheries are very different. Blurring the 2 doesn't help angling move forward or progress these issues.

Purchased stock and livelihoods are emotive issues but do they and should they concern rivers? Not in my opinion, we are guests of the river and should try and keep them as natural as possible and interfere with them as little as possible also.

But and its a big but (hmmm big butts), we meddle and manage, build weirs, take out bends, put in chemicals, take out weed beds, put in invasive species, take out cover, add flood defences, throw in oily pellet (t.i.c that one!), stock fish, bbq fish et cetera. the list goes on and on.

The issues surrounding each river will be different, there will be no right solution for every area. But anglers should be consulted and be part of any conservation plans for local areas.


Hows about Angling asks the simple question-

When will Otters reach a number where they no longer need protection?

That level needs to be established and then perhaps some sort of predation action plan could be sorted out but untill such number is identified then the debate is stagnant.

From my 'own' rivers point of view, sorting the predation issue is the tip of the ice-berg. Even if the predation issues were sorted then the coffin lid would still well and truly be nailed shut as only the last nail would have been pulled
Click to expand...

I largely agree with this Ash but think there are other, equally important questions. For example, on rivers where fish stocks have been profoundly impacted by predation-including in large part by otters- what remedial plan does the EA have to ensure that the otter, a highly protected animal, has a sustainable and viable food source?

Let's assume that as a matter of fact, otters have been predominantly responsible for the material reduction in fish stocks on a certain river. Aren't the EA and otter enthusiasts in general, concerned for the well being of otters that, with reduced preferred food sources available will either need to turn to other, less nutritionally valuable food sources, or pack up their ottery belongings and find another river etc. In doing so they run the very real risk of encountering death-on roads or in fights with other otters.

Is there not a small piece of common ground for anglers, otter lovers, wildlife enthusiasts and even people that wear wooden shoes and enjoy the company of wasps to occupy?

Establish mutual dependency and you are just about there. We all want and need rivers to be healthy, to flourish. I love otters and what they represent as a feature of our green and pleasant land. But in that moment when I see them emerge from the river, barbel firmly clasped in their mouths, I totally despise them. I imagine that's because I'm human. And a rubbish barbel angler.
 
Howard nothing wrong at all in what you are saying but mutual dependency in a food chain begins at the first trophic level ie photosynthesisers and without these the whole food chain is in serious trouble. So if we, and it is humans, have significantly effected this in rivers, and we have via eutrophication and other forms of pollution and so called river management, then in time the whole chain will have to adapt or collapse - the obvious visible signs of this are the impact on those at the top of the food chain such as the otter. Why has there been an increase in barbel across the country in rivers where they were not native and what impact does this have in itself on the ecosystem - we do not really know. The recent spread of the otter has/is also probably leading to an imbalance in river ecosystems (along with many other factors) however over time the system will adapt and will result in otter numbers reaching an equilibrium; this as anglers may be a level we do not appreciate, but it how these systems work. I would argue that otters are a requirement in our river food chain and perhaps the fact that they were hunted almost to extinction in itself has had a significant impact on the food chain. I suspect we know at a broad level how much food an otter requires and therefore territory but do we know how this applies to the River Kennet - probably not as we have no real idea of the biomass available in the food chain and what equilibrium is. So we are back to improving the riverine environment from the bottom up and letting nature find its own equilibrium, however being an open system ie with inputs we cannot control rainfall/geology etc, it is hugely problematic. The removal of an apex predator will solve nothing and as with the gray wolf hunting in the US may lead to a serious ecosystem disturbance and possible collapse. I struggle to think where humans, as this planets apex predator, has intervened in an ecosystem to any beneficial effect. I think the only thing that is certain is that as just being one species at some point in the future we will also become extinct either through our own stupid mis management of this planet or some unforseen natural event.
 
Hi Paul, in terms of mutual dependancy, I was referring to the various interested bodies (anglers/conservationists etc.) that can generally take a directly opposing, sometimes combative stance in matters such as these. My point being that the reality is we all should have our attention focusesed on the fundamental issues affecting our rivers because ultimately, you would imagine it's in all our interests for them to thrive.
 
just to Make a Point some fools are now showing great interest in releasing wolf population in some uk areas AHHHH aint they lovely furry things , wait until people and CHILDREN get savaged and maybe killed by these when they start taking over big areas of land, oh its natere being restored eh? more like bloody fools meddling without thought for other reasons not to, if they do this otters will have an apex predator after them so maybe from a selfish point good let em breed and release those wolves, no more roaming around in forests of england, no more roaming on mountain sides or national trust lands
much too dangerous with wild wolf packs around but never mind the government will decide to MAYBE do something about it in 10 years after the event, i knew a guy who use to breed and release owls all over his surrounding areas, result only very few hedgehogs left in the area now,
a good comparison of what WILL happen to our specimen sized river fish with otters, AHWOOOOOOL
 
Wolves do not attack humans, in fact as you will know probably there is a Wolf on average in every household I have two, domesticated dogs kill more humans than wolves.
You also blame the release of owls on the demise of Mrs Tiggiwinkle, and yet Owls prey on rodents such as voles rats and mice.
Of course the reintroduction of Wolves, even in the Scottish Highlands would be controversial, but I would rather have Wolves in Scotland than that Trump bloke.:rolleyes:
 
Neil Smart said:
Wolves do not attack humans, in fact as you will know probably there is a Wolf on average in every household I have two, domesticated dogs kill more humans than wolves.
You also blame the release of owls on the demise of Mrs Tiggiwinkle, and yet Owls prey on rodents such as voles rats and mice.
Of course the reintroduction of Wolves, even in the Scottish Highlands would be controversial, but I would rather have Wolves in Scotland than that Trump bloke.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...


Sorry Neil but I am afraid that they do, always have and always will, do a quick search there have been lots of attacks, frequency depends on what continent you are in.
 
But usually if they are in the wrong place at the wrong time and often the wolf is rabid - the number of deaths in N America are very small (in the USA there were none between 1888 and 2008) - more people are killed by bee stings... Wolves are not like big cats they do not hunt people...so let's not start some more myths about wildlife on this thread... As for reintroduction in the UK https://ukwct.org.uk/files/reintroducing.pdf
 
Graham Young said:
Sorry Neil but I am afraid that they do, always have and always will, do a quick search there have been lots of attacks, frequency depends on what continent you are in.
Click to expand...

No , you have been influenced by Little Red Riding Hood Graham, Wolves go out of their way to avoid Humans, so not really a danger at all considering.I
But, I have been mauled by Timber Wolf though, well it was supposed to be an Alsation, but it kept biting it's USAF handlers, so was donated to RAF Police, the section Cpl set King on me as a training exercise, and despite all the padding I had I still ended up in sick quartets, King looked every inch a Wolf, but he went on to be a good police dog, and even served in the RAF demonstration team.:)
 
they only go out of their way to avoid humans if they AINT HUNGRY, have you ever seen a real wolf live Neil?
they are more than likely the most dangerous animal in europe when in a hungry pack, house pets are no comparison in any event compared to a hungry wolf, the only reason more people in uk get killed by domestic dogs is because theres no wolves loose in uk, hey hold on your not far from biblins are you, why not go camping i a lonely bit of forest of dean near biblins, plenty of scary wild stuff there mate, big pumas, wild boar, crazy stags and plenty of other stuff too, dont take my word for it ask rayo or others, the nearest wild wolves are in france:eek:
 
They're carnivores, and my guess is they often eat stuff a little bigger than rats and voles, so someone is going to be upset. It'll be interesting for sure.

Nick C
 
but according to tv program i watched this week a scottish landowner is already
far into doing such a breed and release in scotland, incidently whoever thinks badgers are not a threat to cattle :rolleyes: try telling that to any cattle breeder or owner in wales or in the west country, its a fact not some thinking it is check it out on defra or better still on the farmers website:cool:
 
Nick i think a little bigger is being very very conservative lol
sheep, cattle even a bear if theyre desperate enough, a man without a decent gun would definately get run down and ate by the pack if hungry enough,
just another example of mans foolishness, now the do gooders are trying to lobby against culling cormorants, they seem to think theyre not harming our freshwater fish lol
 
John Walker said:
they only go out of their way to avoid humans if they AINT HUNGRY, have you ever seen a real wolf live Neil?
they are more than likely the most dangerous animal in europe when in a hungry pack, house pets are no comparison in any event compared to a hungry wolf, the only reason more people in uk get killed by domestic dogs is because theres no wolves loose in uk, hey hold on your not far from biblins are you, why not go camping i a lonely bit of forest of dean near biblins, plenty of scary wild stuff there mate, big pumas, wild boar, crazy stags and plenty of other stuff too, dont take my word for it ask rayo or others, the nearest wild wolves are in france:eek:
Click to expand...

Not to mention the locals:eek:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top