Government gives go ahead for New Cormorant and Goosander Management Plan

[Graham Young]

Graham, looking at the news release on the AT website, the first measure outlined refers to the funding of three fisheries management advisors. I took that to mean that part of the negotiations had been to secure that funding from the government, albeit that the advisors will be employed by the AT. If they were being funded directly by the AT then I doubt it would have constituted a "new measure". That's how I read it anyway.

You read it one way I another Howard, the fact is it doesn't say who will pay, perhaps someone from the trust will clarify the point?

The "some people baulk" was uncalled for, are we to go back to the days of "you can have an opinion as long as its the same as mine"? I do not think there will be huge reductions in the numbers of these predators despite the work done by the trust, it is my opinion and just as valid as anyone else. (I realise the comment wasn't made by you)

 

[Joe Fletcher]

Pike, Perch and Zander take the weaker fish out of a fishery, allowing stronger fish to survive, this leads to better brood stocks and more successful spawning. They have had a very positive effect on Rutland and Grafham waters for example

Zander are also a prime target for Cormorants, Goosanders, etc.... Without which more of other species would be taken!!

Ian I think you will find history is against you . It has been shown and proved when man interferes with nature the native species suffer ?
Look at the impact Signal Cray fish have had on native cratfish ?
Mink is another one that has had a impact on Voles and other wild life .
Red Squirrels have gone from the England because of Grey Squirrels .
Where man has interfered the world over the native species have suffered .

So are you saying that Zander are the exception to the rule and should be treated different ?

 

[Ian Crook]

Ian I think you will find history is against you . It has been shown and proved when man interferes with nature the native species suffer ?
Look at the impact Signal Cray fish have had on native cratfish ?
Mink is another one that has had a impact on Voles and other wild life .
Red Squirrels have gone from the England because of Grey Squirrels .
Where man has interfered the world over the native species have suffered .

So are you saying that Zander are the exception to the rule and should be treated different ?

You will simply find an argument to any point presented for no good reason, this is stupid, there were no native Zander to have suffered at the intro of a foreign one, I guess the closest relation would be the Perch and yes, they are thriving too in the waters with Zander!! Anyhow, better things to do with my time so I will duck out now, argue with yourself!!

 

[Neil Blood]

Does anyone believe that any of the above will actually achieve anything other than create 3 new jobs at the AT?

These 3 "advisers" will produce a report that will be "reviewed" (aka do nothing)

The license application form will be simplified but it will still be refused once submitted.

There will be a removal of limits on the license that clubs were not able to obtain in the first place. (Catch 22 alive and well in the land of the Civil Servant)

Even if an all out cull was made possible, and every club and controlling body in the land was given permission to kill every Otter Cormorant and Goosander on sight, it would still be unworkable.

What resource do people actually think clubs and controlling bodies have at their disposal that could carry out such a cull in an safe effective manner?

Steve

Do you have an alternative? Also why poo poo something before giving it a chance? As someone who has been involved in legally shooting cormorants in the past, I know first hand how difficult it can be, although that said I never had a licence application refused.

At least what we have here is a start and I'll reserve judgement until its had time to function.

Regards,

Neil

 

[Joe Fletcher]

You will simply find an argument to any point presented for no good reason, this is stupid, there were no native Zander to have suffered at the intro of a foreign one, I guess the closest relation would be the Perch and yes, they are thriving too in the waters with Zander!! Anyhow, better things to do with my time so I will duck out now, argue with yourself!!

Ian I am not arguring with you ? Just stating the facts as they are ?
History has proved time and time again when man interferes then the balance of nature suffers .
Zander are not native to UK waters and were introduced illigally .
That is a fact you can not argue with ?

There has been a long running argument on here about the reintroduction of Otters and the effect Cormorants are having on fish stocks ?

I assume like many other Anglers you fish for Zander and would oppose any cull of Zander ?
I wonder how many of those Anglers opposed to a cull of illigally stocked Zander would like to see Otters culled ?

To me Ian it smacks of hypocrisy to save one species for the sake of another ?

 

[Nick Anderson]

Agreed Joe, and Grahams post about you can have an opinion as long as it's the same as mine is spot on.

 

[Steve Stringer]

Do you have an alternative? Also why poo poo something before giving it a chance? As someone who has been involved in legally shooting cormorants in the past, I know first hand how difficult it can be, although that said I never had a licence application refused.

At least what we have here is a start and I'll reserve judgement until its had time to function.

Regards,

Neil

Neil,

The point I'm making is that if clubs were allowed to shoot as many cormorants as they wanted it would make little difference. However that is just my opinion whereas you will be able to give us hard figures.

How many cormorants were you able to shoot over what period of time? Were you able to shoot 100 a day or less than 3? How much did you charge to do this? How much do you think it would cost a club to hire a marksman such as yourself on a daily basis? What rifle did you use? How long do you think it would be before members of the public out walking dogs would started to be injured by stray bullets? And if you shot them all in one day how long before the next batch would move in?

Do I have an alternative? Why not treat the cause of the problem instead of the effect and ban beam trawling in our inshore waters. Let's try that for starters before we start blasting away in the countryside.

Steve

 

[David Gauntlett]

To me Ian it smacks of hypocrisy to save one species for the sake of another ?

What exactly, in English, does the above statement mean? I am not trying to be awkward, or critical....just genuinely curious.

Cheers, Dave.

 

[David Gauntlett]

For those who keep bleating on about cormorants being a native species, this petition, with the likes of Hugh Miles behind it, points to the truth. Huge numbers of the cormorants now invading our inland waters are in fact a sub species from Europe, in particular Denmark and the Netherlands. Not only are they not our native species, it is a known fact that this sub species habitually prefers inland waters to the open sea.

Which kind of kicks the old red herring 'They are only our native species that have come inland because we have destroyed their natural feeding grounds' into a cocked hat doesn't it? No doubt these types of bird migrations have always occurred...but the effects and damage caused in the past went mostly unnoticed by the average Joe's like us because such invasions were controlled by those aware of the problems....and before serious damage was done.

It would seem likely then that once more 'New Age Political Correctness' has taken another stride forwards. These new, ill thought out total protection laws offered to many predators, often allowing them to proliferate to unheard of levels...is as Hugh states, placing our other wildlife in mortal danger. There is now a total imbalance of predators over fodder species, who of course are offered no protection at all. Anyone care to predict where that will all end up?

Cormorants in the uk Petitions | Petition Tags | GoPetition - Page: 1

Cheers, Dave.

 

[Joe Fletcher]

It would seem likely then that once more 'New Age Political Correctness' has taken another stride forwards. These new, ill thought out total protection laws offered to many predators, often allowing them to proliferate to unheard of levels...is as Hugh states, placing our other wildlife in mortal danger. There is now a total imbalance of predators over fodder species, who of course are offered no protection at all. Anyone care to predict where that will all end up?

Cormorants in the uk Petitions | Petition Tags | GoPetition - Page: 1

Cheers, Dave.

David as you correctly point out ? A total imbalance of predator species over fodder species ? and my point being Zander are not native to UK waters .
So having intruduced a non native predator to our waters , Would you not aggree that it has had a impact on as you call them our fodder species ?

If its ok to call for a cull/control of Otters , Cormorants then why is it not ok to include Zander ? are people really suggesting that over the years that Zander has not had a impact on our native species ?

That is what I meant when I said it smacks of hypocrisy .

 

[Graham Young]

For those who keep bleating on about cormorants being a native species, this petition, with the likes of Hugh Miles behind it, points to the truth. Huge numbers of the cormorants now invading our inland waters are in fact a sub species from Europe, in particular Denmark and the Netherlands. Not only are they not our native species, it is a known fact that this sub species habitually prefers inland waters to the open sea.

Which kind of kicks the old red herring 'They are only our native species that have come inland because we have destroyed their natural feeding grounds' into a cocked hat doesn't it? No doubt these types of bird migrations have always occurred...but the effects and damage caused in the past went mostly unnoticed by the average Joe's like us because such invasions were controlled by those aware of the problems....and before serious damage was done.

It would seem likely then that once more 'New Age Political Correctness' has taken another stride forwards. These new, ill thought out total protection laws offered to many predators, often allowing them to proliferate to unheard of levels...is as Hugh states, placing our other wildlife in mortal danger. There is now a total imbalance of predators over fodder species, who of course are offered no protection at all. Anyone care to predict where that will all end up?

Cormorants in the uk Petitions | Petition Tags | GoPetition - Page: 1

Cheers, Dave.

I think you know where this may all end up David, IMO it will all end badly, whether it be otters or others they will in the end eat themselves out of house and home, how long that will take I don't know or what state our fisheries will be in.

I applaud anyone that has tried in whatever way to get something done about the over population of predators on our waters and that includes the trust even though I believe its far to little and certainly for some waters to late.

Although the number of anglers is high we are in a minority in caring what goes on under the water, until (if ever) the none fishing public realise that whats under is (and in some cases more) as important as what they see above the surface to the whole balance of a waters ecology we will struggle to get anything done.

I have signed the petition you gave a link for.

 

[Martin James]

Since I have had a licence I certainly notice less cormorants on my water, those that do survive probably get the message. I make sure I have a gun on my water at dawn and dusk which is when most activity occurs, I also carry a handgun that fires blanks which certainly scares off any approaching predator bird. Sadly to few fishery owners can't bother to apply for a permit, then take action when they do so. I usually get told by many they can’t be bothered. It’s the same with hand lines, many are found in the rivers but too few fishery owners and anglers can be bothered to look. I then get asked by the EA if they can have the evidence that I retrieve for the horror museum. What the EA should do is get out of the office and onto the river banks, not the small commercial fisheries. These thieves don’t tend to target these waters.

 

[Jim Foxall]

Some good stuff posted. At lease cormorants are now on the radar and that can only be a step in the right direction. Shooting is a sticking plaster. Numbers need to be controlled at source by oiling their eggs. Those members of the public who are a bit prissy about shooting would be less excited by the oiling approach.
I can only see fish stocks declining. Eventually, nature will balance out and when the fish stocks have reached a critical level, then the numbers of cormorants, otters etc will correspondingly decline and the EEs will have given up and gone home. Numbers of fish will then recover and you never know, a more common sense approach may then de adopted in fish management.

I would not be too surprised if opinion does not eventually turn against otters, it would only have to take a photo of an otter biting a lump out of a cygnet's neck to do the trick. That would set a bit of a quandary for the RSPB. Don't forget, once, people thought grey squirrels were cute, not any more.

How about setting up a breeding programme for magpies and then releasing them in numbers, preferably on RSPB turf so that they are well looked after and not shot at or controlled by rapacious farmers/landowners. Beautiful birds and lovely to watch them in the springtime foraging for food. It's always the same, you see what you want to see and if it doesn't affect "me" then it's not an issue.

 

[David Gauntlett]

Joe....I am not, as you seem to think, at complete odds with you on the Zander position...I doubt very much that Howard is either. They are NOT a native species, they should NOT be here. The history of zander in this country goes way back to the 1870's, in Woburn Park...but the really meaningful introduction was carried out by Anglian Water, who released large batches into the Great Ouse relief channel in 1963...what happened then is, as they say, history.

The problem is, how would you go about eradicating a species of fish as well established as zander are? The EA has discovered that the only workable method to tackle the much more recent (and potentially disastrous) illegally introduced species (Topmouth Gudgeon) is to use a piscicide (rotenone I believe) which wipes out virtually everything in the water involved, which is why they usually confine this to enclosed waters rather than rivers. As numerous attempts at controlling problem fish species in the past has shown, any other methods are completely unsuccessful. I am fairly sure that nobody would want that on our popular rivers....though it must be said that the profit making machine that is corporate England are having a damned gould go at achieving that goal already

It would seem then that controlling zander in any meaningful way is virtually impossible. On the other hand, cormorants and other predators that are easily seen because they spend a great deal of their lives above water...are obviously relatively easy to control. That may not be fair, if that's the way you wish to see it....but it is a fact. So...realistically speaking...we have as you admit, an imbalance in the predator/prey fish numbers. We CAN (and in my opinion should) redress that imbalance by sensible control of the species where that is a practical and realistic possibility (perhaps I should qualify that by saying mechanically possible ).

Fact is Joe, I honestly feel that my generation have probably seen the best/last of traditional fishing, as we know it. I don't think I would really want to be a youngster starting out in angling know. I think 'natural' will soon be a thing of the past, the modern madness of 'political correctness' will see to that. Safe, sterilised, non threatening, no risk 'nanny state' European dictats will eventually make such things mere memories....if we allow that. I guess the few youngsters joining our hobby now will be OK...it's liable to be a far more 'instant gratification' type thing in overstocked ponds, which will probably suit their modern lifestyle and mindset anyway ....it may even come down to 'apps' on their mobile phones eventually However, I digress

Cheers, Dave.

 

[Rod Fowler]

Yes, well said Ian. This thread was beginning to read like yet another excuse not to support the AT.

 

[Graham Young]

Yes, well said Ian. This thread was beginning to read like just another excuse not to support the AT.

I don't see this thread as that at all, it has been as far as I can see different points of view put forward by anglers all of which care about the fish they choose to fish for.

As far as I can see from reading the report the government have agreed to raise the amount from 2000 to 3000 and to monitor whether the need is there in different areas for more birds to be shot via the new positions within the trust.

It is a step in the right direction but a very small one that looks to me that the government are trying to appease all parties interested in controlling or preserving.

I no longer support the trust by being a member but I do not fail to realise that they do try to represent the views of anglers, unfortunately they no longer represent my views, I will not go into why on hear as these type of things can end in squabbles, I respect the views of anyone that is a member and would expect the same in return.

 

[Nathan Walter]

I find the "too little too late" rhetoric aired at the AT as a rather distorted view. The simple fact remains that no other body has fought so hard, negotiated so strenuously to combat the massive problem of Cormorant predation in the UK's inland waterways. They have managed to do this despite an overwhelming lack of support from the majority of UK anglers who regularly bemoan the lack of action taken by the AT, or its impotency at dealing with the multitude of problems faced by anglers.

The AT have very limited resources. They have a pathetic uptake on membership, despite some simply outstanding success stories that would not have been achieved without them. They continue to involve themselves in all matter of issues that potentially damage angling and our waterways. At last (and probably for the first time) a united angling body has been able to campaign at a governmental level and actually be heard and be involved in so many discussions and negotiations. Anglers and angling would simply be ignored otherwise.

Forget what's gone before; the angling bodies that tried previously but ultimately failed. I appreciate there are some very bruised egos out there from past environmental/angling champions, that desperately tried to make a real difference. Those that failed before should now look to the future and that can only be the Angling Trust in my opinion. I hope it continues to evolve and grow and eventually work with the many other regional trusts and river groups to improve our waterways and fight for angling.

None of what has been achieved would have happened if angling had carried it on as it was. We would be totally lacking in direction and completely impotent to influence government and implement necessary changes to policies to try and make a real difference.

 

[Nick Clark]

I find the "too little too late" rhetoric aired at the AT as a rather distorted view. The simple fact remains that no other body has fought so hard, negotiated so strenuously to combat the massive problem of Cormorant predation in the UK's inland waterways. They have managed to do this despite an overwhelming lack of support from the majority of UK anglers who regularly bemoan the lack of action taken by the AT, or its impotency at dealing with the multitude of problems faced by anglers.

The AT have very limited resources. They have a pathetic uptake on membership, despite some simply outstanding success stories that would not have been achieved without them. They continue to involve themselves in all matter of issues that potentially damage angling and our waterways. At last (and probably for the first time) a united angling body has been able to campaign at a governmental level and actually be heard and be involved in so many discussions and negotiations. Anglers and angling would simply be ignored otherwise.

Forget what's gone before; the angling bodies that tried previously but ultimately failed. I appreciate there are some very bruised egos out there from past environmental/angling champions, that desperately tried to make a real difference. Those that failed before should now look to the future and that can only be the Angling Trust in my opinion. I hope it continues to evolve and grow and eventually work with the many other regional trusts and river groups to improve our waterways and fight for angling.

None of what has been achieved would have happened if angling had carried it on as it was. We would be totally lacking in direction and completely impotent to influence government and implement necessary changes to policies to try and make a real difference.

Well said Nathan

 

[Martin James]

Nathan well said, I couldn't agree more. Without the AT I doubt if anything would have been done about cormorants. Regards Martin

 

[Graham Young]

I find the "too little too late" rhetoric aired at the AT as a rather distorted view. The simple fact remains that no other body has fought so hard, negotiated so strenuously to combat the massive problem of Cormorant predation in the UK's inland waterways. They have managed to do this despite an overwhelming lack of support from the majority of UK anglers who regularly bemoan the lack of action taken by the AT, or its impotency at dealing with the multitude of problems faced by anglers.

The AT have very limited resources. They have a pathetic uptake on membership, despite some simply outstanding success stories that would not have been achieved without them. They continue to involve themselves in all matter of issues that potentially damage angling and our waterways. At last (and probably for the first time) a united angling body has been able to campaign at a governmental level and actually be heard and be involved in so many discussions and negotiations. Anglers and angling would simply be ignored otherwise.

Forget what's gone before; the angling bodies that tried previously but ultimately failed. I appreciate there are some very bruised egos out there from past environmental/angling champions, that desperately tried to make a real difference. Those that failed before should now look to the future and that can only be the Angling Trust in my opinion. I hope it continues to evolve and grow and eventually work with the many other regional trusts and river groups to improve our waterways and fight for angling.

None of what has been achieved would have happened if angling had carried it on as it was. We would be totally lacking in direction and completely impotent to influence government and implement necessary changes to policies to try and make a real difference.

Nathan, as you know I have I have issues with "some" of the things the trust have done and also things within the trust, however this does not detract from the fact that I appreciate the need for an "angling voice" some of the things they have achieved have been good for angling some I am afraid have not. The Keith the seal debacle is an illustration of a massive PR mistake, I use this merely as a point to show what can happen if things are put into the public domain without being thought through.

My comment of it being to late was possibly a little wooly and open to different interpretation, by to late I meant that for a lot of waters it is to late.

I now read in a piece by Martin Salter that we should be thinking of joining forces with the RSPB but to do this we will have to "put aside" the disagreement about Cormarants. I believe this would be a big mistake and the trust would be used until the RSPB get what they want and then angling would be dropped like a hot brick.