Otter Devestation??

[David Gauntlett]

Shaun and Jeff, again I fully agree with both of you. The fisheries in my area have already suffered hugely from the predations of the 'black plague'...and I absolutely dread the arrival of otters in any numbers. On rivers the size of my local Colne, that usually signals the end of good barbel sport in real terms.

So yes, we absolutely must get something done about this nonsensical total protection policy on otters. The AT ARE working on it, and if the success they are just beginning to have on the cormorant problem is anything to go by, then they will eventually get there. If we support them in the numbers we should, rather than act in the way anglers traditionally do (i.e, with apathy) then we may at last have a representative body that will be a force to be reckoned with.

As you say Shaun, it would help enormously if we gather and collate evidence of the massive damage the total protection policiy is allowing to take place. Sadly, the levels of the damage being wrought, and the number of riverine species off ALL types that will disappear for ever, is something that will not become clear for some time.

All my original post on this thread was meant to convey was that showing pictures of a single dead fish will NOT impress those we need to impress. However, the OTT comments that will inevitably follow that WILL impress those who wish anglers harm...they will be most grateful to be receiving such unsolicited gifts I repeat, we must NOT present ourselves as a disorganised rabble screaming for blood. Cool, organised, united pressure is what will win this for us in the end.

I repeat, I fully believe you are right Shaun, we need such photos. But they need to be in the form of a massive file of raw pictures, plus endless proofs of fisheries and other businesses that have been forced to close as a result of these ill thought out policies. 'Shock and awe' is the name of the game, impress the hell out of them In the hands of the AT, such stuff may very well do the trick...because it will be organised, professional and well presented. The sort of stuff governments understand.

Cheers, Dave.

 

[Dave Taylor]

Dave,
I see that there are 1,317 active members on this forum,..why not start here?
It will make a depressing thread I know, but if we all document probable otter kills and supply date stamped photo evidence over a season, then we have something of a start.
Carp forums could do the same,..just a thought.
dt

 

[Shaun Nurse]

I for one would be willing to start putting together everyones documentation and keeping on to the E.A and A.T sending it as it arrives, and making a portfolia for the whole country over the season. This would hopefully show the regional effects and hot spots etc. It will also enormously help them to monitor numbers etc if we can get pic`s of Otters or their prey filed for various rivers and regions. We can do this as I know that many of you have pictures already, we can start with a montage of pictures up to now, and then as Dave suggests everything from now on with dates and precise info...What do you think??

 

[Dave Taylor]

Thanks Shaun,...sounds like I ought to set my trail camera up at Ibsley and get a vidio of an otter munching on that rare beast called an Avon salmon!

Seriously though, we ought to use this forum to our advantage and work together to build up the evidence we need to make our point.

 

[Jim Foxall]

Gathering evidence and putting together a case will take years and years. However during this period of reflection some waters will be pillaged. I can see no reason why an otter cannot be relocated. If there is a real threat to a local habitat whether it be fish/voles or birdlife then action needs to be taken sooner rather than later. Paralysis, whilst waiting for a scrapbook of evidence to be collated will be too late for some situations. If it is legal for otters to be released at certain venues then it must be equally legal to relocate them where necessary. Additionally, I can't see why all otters can't be trapped and tagged so that their movements can be recorded. This would provide a wealth of scientific evidence.

 

[David Gauntlett]

Looking on the 'Natural England' site Jim, you find the following, which details exactly why you can't 'capture or relocate' otters......

"Otters and their resting places are fully protected, it is an offence to deliberately capture, injure or kill them or to damage, destroy or obstruct their breeding or resting places. It is also an offence to disturb otters in their breeding or resting places".

On the other hand, it appears from the following that you can obtain a licence to deal with otter problems. I have not yet read the restrictions laid down by the act, but I am sure 'Fish Legal' lawyers have, at the behest of the AT. The fact that they have not acted on this information suggests to me that to obtain the license mentioned in this next bit probably requires blue blood in the veins, or a top world class salmon beat to protect at the very least ......

"There is, however, provision within the legislation to kill, take, disturb or possess otters or to use prohibited methods to kill or take under a licence in certain defined circumstances, if the issue cannot be resolved by any alternative means".

It is food for thought though....there is a Middleton sister as yet unmarried, which you younger chaps might consider a reasonable challenge

Shaun, getting organised, collecting and collating evidence and presenting it to the AT and other interested parties has got to be the way to go.

Cheers, Dave.

 

[Andrew Boyne]

I for one would be willing to start putting together everyones documentation and keeping on to the E.A and A.T sending it as it arrives, and making a portfolia for the whole country over the season. This would hopefully show the regional effects and hot spots etc. It will also enormously help them to monitor numbers etc if we can get pic`s of Otters or their prey filed for various rivers and regions. We can do this as I know that many of you have pictures already, we can start with a montage of pictures up to now, and then as Dave suggests everything from now on with dates and precise info...What do you think??

If you want meaningful evidence that Otters are devastating our rivers surely you would need accurate data regarding fish stocks to prove the decline? Otherwise you are just gathering evidence that Otters eat fish and that was proven some time ago.

 

[Shaun Nurse]

As I said Andrew not just fish but "their" prey, (whatever else it is) and also "their" prevelance in certain areas. It would be seen as observational research, I know that lots here will be able to say "saw X amount of Otters today on my stretch of river at Y time", just this is noteworthy. Check this out as this is all the modern research I can find to date..... http://webarchive.nationalarchives....tatic/documents/Business/Otters_the_facts.pdf

 

[Tim Lennon]

If you want meaningful evidence that Otters are devastating our rivers surely you would need accurate data regarding fish stocks to prove the decline? Otherwise you are just gathering evidence that Otters eat fish and that was proven some time ago.

You're absolutely right Andrew. Typically, the data would need to be gathered over a ten year period. The problem is that these surveys are often carried out "after the horse has bolted", and so no decline is shown during the survey period.

 

[John Walker]

a spde and a hole

 

[Jim Foxall]

Looking on the 'Natural England' site Jim, you find the following, which details exactly why you can't 'capture or relocate' otters......

"Otters and their resting places are fully protected, it is an offence to deliberately capture, injure or kill them or to damage, destroy or obstruct their breeding or resting places. It is also an offence to disturb otters in their breeding or resting places".

On the other hand, it appears from the following that you can obtain a licence to deal with otter problems. I have not yet read the restrictions laid down by the act, but I am sure 'Fish Legal' lawyers have, at the behest of the AT. The fact that they have not acted on this information suggests to me that to obtain the license mentioned in this next bit probably requires blue blood in the veins, or a top world class salmon beat to protect at the very least ......

"There is, however, provision within the legislation to kill, take, disturb or possess otters or to use prohibited methods to kill or take under a licence in certain defined circumstances, if the issue cannot be resolved by any alternative means".

It is food for thought though....there is a Middleton sister as yet unmarried, which you younger chaps might consider a reasonable challenge

Shaun, getting organised, collecting and collating evidence and presenting it to the AT and other interested parties has got to be the way to go.

Cheers, Dave.

Good to hear from you Dave. It would seem that the groups releasing otters were not overburdened with legislation and played fast and loose as to what they could introduce and where etc. I would have thought that the same rules would apply to moving/relocating them where they are proving to be a problem. Far better to move them than for people to take the law unto their own hands. I would question whether these otters are truly wild animals having been artificially reared and released. It is no accident that otters were hunted in days gone by. The same reasons probably still exist today.

 

[Darren Scott]

You know it would n't be half as bad if they actually ate all of what they catch, but they don't, they eat the insides and a little flesh, they have to catch 4 or 5 fish to eat the equivalent of one whole one.

Such a destructive predator, these are Swale fish on a Leeds DASA stretch.

 

[Rhys Perry]

That's because they would normally eat smaller fish but there aren't any due to other issues, sort these out and you won't have otter problems.

Otters were hunted for their fur mostly I'd imagine.

 

[Darren Scott]

That's because they would normally eat smaller fish but there aren't any due to other issues, sort these out and you won't have otter problems.

Otters were hunted for their fur mostly I'd imagine.

I imagine larger fish are easier to catch for a variety of reasons too.

 

[Ade Reynolds]

They will always prefer to take an oily fish, eels for example
How many eels you lads fishing the Bristol Avon caught recently?

 

[Andrew Boyne]

That's because they would normally eat smaller fish but there aren't any due to other issues, sort these out and you won't have otter problems.

Otters were hunted for their fur mostly I'd imagine.

Quite so Rhys - a point raised in the report Shaun linked - some rivers are suffering, others are not despite the presence of Otters. Seams logical that those with poor fry recruitment will suffer most. I disagree on the Fur thing though, perhaps originally yes, but in recent times I imagine the Otter was hunted mainly because it is in direct conflict with mans attempts to catch fish. Plenty on here would like to see that return unfortunately.

 

[David Hall]

Otters were hunted as they posed a threat to fresh water stocks that people used to eat especially eels.
One of the reasons to reintroduce them as the logic was, no one eats fresh water fish anymore so that threat had gone.

 

[David Gauntlett]

Otters were hunted with packs of dogs to control their numbers, much in the way foxes were....because the natural predator/prey balance needed to be maintained for the good of the ecology.

For gods sake people, it's not rocket science. If the larger predators indigenous to a country are exterminated because they pose a direct threat to the lives of humans, then the largest of the predators left becomes the new 'apex' predator. In this country (and some others) the new 'top dogs' were the fox and the otter.

With the larger predators no longer present to control the numbers of these animals, they would would soon become too numerous for the existing ecology to be sustained. Oh...and before you say it, yes they ARE self limiting...but not necessarily back to the numbers required to sustain the natural status quo. Nature intended a balance...it's the only way things can work, and so provided the creatures required to maintain that natural balance.

People who lived in and were close to the land understood it...and they understood that by the changes we wrought, we have naffed the natural balances up. To that end, they took on the vacated roll of the old controlling 'apex predator' and did what needed doing. OK, it was often less altruistic than I make it sound, because frequently it was done to protect trout and salmon or game, but whatever the motive...it worked. Foxes and otters were not exterminated...they were merely kept at a population level that allowed the balance to be maintained, a balance that kept the land and rivers healthy (or at least as healthy as pollution allowed)

Sadly, the 'new' and 'better' ways now hold sway. Political correctness has taken such a grip that our 'civilised' areas of the world have become bizarre places. For instance, my grandchildren will not eat meat or fish until it has been rendered sterile and processed to such an extent that it is no longer recognisable as being part of an animal/fish. They KNOW it still does come from an animal/fish...but they need it to be unrecognisable as such, so that they can pretend it isn't, thereby freeing themselves from having a guilty conscience at being responsible in part for any cruelty...and certainly the death...of that animal. And they are not alone in that. THAT is the way 'New Man' thinks in general.

In a word, they are in 'Denial'. They pretend things are not what they actually are, so that they can feel better about themselves. If the nasty press people expose the extreme cruelty of the battery hen system that provides their fried egg sarnies and their beloved 'chicken nuggets', then the industry comes up with a new name for the process...we now have 'barn chickens' etc. Nothing much has changed...but everyone can munch away to their hearts content again, without the horrid feelings of guilt reality brings. At the same time they are also happily in denial about the fact that their 'politically correct', guilt free, sterilised and processed to death food has lead to the recent World Health Authority announcement that Britain is now recognised as the fattest (and thus the most unhealthy) nation in Europe.

Way to go 'New, politically correct' sterilised, ever so not cruel, wouldn't hear of anything being killed (at least not by them) Britain. Top marks, you have produced a nation where for the first time in a century or more, our children and grandchildren may well have shorter life spans than their parents/grandparents. Probably just as well...the epidemic proportions of obesity in Britain now represents the single most costly health problem we have...it costs us billions of pounds every year, and it is widely predicted that this alone will bring the NHS to it's knees within ten years. So...we couldn't afford to hospitalise and treat everyone if they did live a natural life span. Sad isn't it?

And of course, we couldn't possibly control otters, cormorants and the like. These 'new' ever so nice, pollitically correct, sterile people have made laws to guarantee that. Why would you want to anyway? Just because it would bring back some semblance of a natural balance? Golly no, that would be cruel...not as cruel as letting the imbalance wipe out umpteen unseen, unnoticed minor riverine species of course...but then, whoever would notice once they are all gone anyway. Besides, it won't be my fault...I am Pollitically Correct' !!!.

Anyway, pass the chicken nuggets please Roger, and make sure they are covered in melted plastic cheese and high fat mayonnaise please, don't want to taste anything like chicken, in case it upsets my (rather large) tummy before tonight's binge drinking session. Oh and Roger...why are there no longer any of those silver wriggly things in that..what's it called...oh yes, that river thingy down there?

Ok, so I went into one again. Shan't apologise though, because it's all horribly true. Lord help us

 

[Rhys Perry]

Dave, what the hell are you on about!? Your obsession with political correctness is pushing you over the edge! You use the phrase five times in that meaningless rant! What's any of it got to do with otters!?
Otters never really had any natural predators, the live mostly in water, what exactly would have preyed upon them so much that we had to take their place?

And calm down!

 

[David Gauntlett]

Dave, what the hell are you on about!? Your obsession with political correctness is pushing you over the edge! You use the phrase five times in that meaningless rant! What's any of it got to do with otters!?
Otters never really had any natural predators, the live mostly in water, what exactly would have preyed upon them so much that we had to take their place?

And calm down!

You are right Rhys, I do need to calm down. However, I only go into a 'meaningless rant' as you put it, because I care. As to your two 'meaningless' points, try bears and wolves for size as far as previous 'apex predators' go, both of which enter water, and will kill otters given a chance...and would find otter cubs roaming the bank a very tasty snack. Lynx would have stalked and killed them on the bank, and a sea eagle would make short work of swimming cubs. No doubt there were numerous others historically, but they will do for now.

I mention 'political correctness' numerous times because that is what is wrong with our country at this time in my opinion. If I mentioned it a thousand times, it still wouldn't be enough. This creeping evil that is destroying our country is so pervasive and insidious that folk are anaesthetized by it, they read the newspapers every day, watch the news on the box and STILL can't see what is happening. The recent revolt in European voting has shown that at least some people are waking up. I wouldn't want Farage or Le Pen running Europe any more than I would the present numpties...but the protest vote that has brought then to sudden prominence shows a growing wave of discontent with the madness that rules currently.

If you can complain about my post by asking 'what has any of it got to do with otters'....then you haven't actually read it Rhys...and have little understanding of what brought about the 'total protection' of otters, and the harm that is doing to our riverine ecology.

No matter Rhys, you have your opinions, and I have mine...which is as it should be for democracy to work. Not that democracy WILL work for much longer....if the planned 'Federal State of Europe', ruled from Brussels, comes to be. Good luck with that Rhys...you will need it.

Cheers, Dave.