• 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...

Otter Devestation??

Just making sure I have not started a major feud Rhys! Not sure that controlling their numbers does only have the option of culling? Allowing natural selection to take place more effectivley does not have to involve culling. Just under your key`s is a whole world of info about ecology, credit the angler with a little savvy.
The fact is, that the anglers are the ones spending so much time there on the ground seeing first hand things that many other of the public do not. I have met several dog walkers who have noticed a marked decrease in the number of wildfowl along the riverbank too, many just don`t look in to - or post on - Bfw, thats all! (Well they don`t report it to the E.A. either).
Anyhow it is provking lot`s of conversation and debate, for this I am glad.
 
Well I mainly fish the Severn Graham, opinion seems split on whether the otter has effected it, you'll no doubt be surprised that I personally don't think they've had that much effect, yes there probably aren't as many as there once was but it's by no means devoid of them.
As I say, they're the least of our worries, yet despite this otter threads spring up every five minutes. I guess it's because you can see first hand their work what with dead fish found on the bank as per the original post from Shaun. The problems we can change, which will make a difference, without fear of a public backlash, hardly get mentioned.

No feuds Shaun, just heated banter ;)
I hear what you're saying, I'm often telling my non-fishing friends the same thing, but nobody is going to listen to a bunch of sad fishermen, they will listen to naturalists, environmentalists etc. non of these have any concerns regarding otters, whether this is down to them not knowing what goes on beneath the surface I don't know. I'm sure some must study fish populations and underwater environments but perhaps longer time is needed and that they're expecting things to eventually balance out?
That's what I would expect to happen, apologies for being so positive!
 
Fair enough. What about the other fish in these rivers? Was there a good balance of smaller species? Did the otters just target the barbel or was it that they had no choice to?
At the end of the day unless there's definitive proof that otters are an ecological disaster across the country you can forget any hope of a cull/control or whatever you want to call it, quite simply the only hope is to address the other issues so they no longer pose a problem on these certain waters.
There's always the illegal culling approach but when they start disappearing the finger pointing will only be in one direction and that's not going to do fishing any favours.

An interesting point about the populations of other fish. The Cherwell had a very diverse population, in particular chub. It was one of the countries premier chub waters and also held good roach, bream and perch populations too. Not any more though but I think this down to signals more than anything else. The sudden disappearance of big barbel on the Cherwell was going to be noticed first as they were very localised, whereas other species were quite evenly spread. For overall and long term damage the signals take some topping on both Cherwell and Windrush. The Windrush had a lot of chub and big dace but all that seems to thrive there now are crayfish and trout, which are generally stocked by Cotswold fly fishers. The trout that is...

Whatever the reason(s) the Thames Valley rivers seem to be among the worst hit by otters, signals, cormorants etc and all in all the future of these rivers as viable fisheries is bleak.
 
Dear All,

This issue never fails to inject controversy. And if that's how it effects anglers, think how controversial it would become once the Tarka loving public get involved?

For clarity. Quote; "The Otter Trust released 117 captive-bred otters between 1983 and 1999, mostly on East Anglian rivers, but with some elsewhere. Their last release was of 17 otters on the upper Thames catchment over a six-month period in 1999.
The Vincent Wildlife Trust released a further 49 rehabilitated animals (i.e. orphaned and injured wild otters kept in captivity until fit for release) between 1990 and 1996, many of these as part of a release programme in Yorkshire.

By the early 1990s it was clear that a strong natural recovery of otters from their strongholds in Wales and south-west England meant that reintroductions were no longer necessary, and by the end of the decade the Otter Trust’s programme was wound up. Now descendants of the released otters form only a tiny proportion of the otter population of England, and most wild otters are the result of the natural recovery of the species after the banning of toxic pesticides."

Whilst I am sceptical about the last paragraph, simply because I have written documentation that proves a lot of the captive releases bred successfully, there is no doubt that those original numbers of captive bred releases did not effect fish stocks on rivers directly. They did however, and this is also well documented, result in the total decimation of a number of still water fisheries where carp stocks were wiped out. Indeed, these original incidences of otter predation formed the basis of the SACG/SAA campaign headed up by Chris Burt to highlight the problem with a specific aim of getting government funding for otter fencing to protect still water fisheries from otters.

Being involved with the campaign at the time my primary concern was the river environment and how any otter revival would effect specimen angling and the stocks of specimen sized fish in rivers. I had read countless papers and studies carried out on otter behaviour which confirmed that otters would indeed target the bigger specimens, especially in winter when fish are torpid. Otter do not hibernate and can be quite active even on the coldest days.

At the time I had no doubt that the otter revival would result in conflict between the huge rise in specialist angling and the otter and said as much in political meetings at the time. I always thought that otters would have little impact on fish stocks and specimen sized fish on our country's larger rivers, but predation would take a heavy toll on some smaller rivers. There is no doubting that this has already happened on many smaller rivers. Rivers like the Wensum for instance has poor recruitment in many areas so predation upon the Wensum's specimen sized fish would be a devastating blow for specialist angling there and of course has proven to be the case. Its the same with Adams Mill with other rivers now coming under serious threat.

However. And this is part of the reality. Even though specimen angling is worth a huge amount of money to the nations economy, we are very small beer in comparison to public opinion and a public that love otters. Added to them, are the hundreds of wildlife organisations, most of whom are very well organised and funded. There is no British or European politician who will go any where near this issue as it stands at the moment. So specimen anglers are in between a rock and a hard place. In plain terms. Our prized fish are important to us, but not to the majority. Otters are one of the very few "wasteful" predators known to man simply because they never return to a kill preferring fresh quarry every time they are hungry.

I know that many here will disagree, but no amount of photographs showing dead fish half eaten by otters will sway public opinion. We are just going to have to get used to the fact that some rivers, and stillwaters of course, will see their specimen sized fish disappear. In the longer term, newly thought out strategies might well prove to be effective towards changing the public opinion about what is after all an apex predator.

Regards,

Lee.
 
I hear what you're saying, I'm often telling my non-fishing friends the same thing, but nobody is going to listen to a bunch of sad fishermen, they will listen to naturalists, environmentalists etc. non of these have any concerns regarding otters, whether this is down to them not knowing what goes on beneath the surface I don't know. I'm sure some must study fish populations and underwater environments but perhaps longer time is needed and that they're expecting things to eventually balance out?
That's what I would expect to happen, apologies for being so positive!

The media won't even listen to someone like Hugh Miles who does not want otters culled, but argues that fish stocks/ river enviroment be greatly improved.
If you read his blog...
HUGH MILES - WILDLIFE ADVENTURES

....the beeb left most of his ''negative'' comments on otters on the cutting room floor!:rolleyes:
 
As he says...

"I’m very fond of otters, they are one of my favourite animals because I have spent years filming them for the BBC. I would hate to see them come to any harm, but when they are so hungry that they are having to eat minnows less than an inch long and twenty were killed recently on Dorset’s roads in just three months, you have to find solutions … one of which is to create better fish habitat on rivers* and protect them from all the threats such as pollution. Otters have recovered but they need more to eat if the success is not to be short lived."

*My underlining
 
We're missing a trick really if you think about it, you could push for improvements for fish habitats and stocking levels to help feed the starving otters!
 
Rhys posted:

Well I mainly fish the Severn Graham, opinion seems split on whether the otter has effected it,

Quelle surprise! The UK's longest river is hardly the basis for making a judgement on the much smaller rivers that many of us fish. The otter population is thriving on many of the Yorkshire rivers where I practice my sport and it doesn't need an angler or conservationist or even a rocket scientist to work out that more mouths need more food! Now depending on where you seek information we are told that otters eat from 15% to 25% of their body weight each day. So lets say a conservative 2lb of fish per day per otter. Do the math, as our friends across the pond would say.
 
Don't recall denying that smaller rivers have otter problems?
Question is do ALL smaller rivers have otter problems, and if not why not? I'm prepared to be proved wrong but isn't the Dove doing ok?
 
An interesting point about the populations of other fish. The Cherwell had a very diverse population, in particular chub. It was one of the countries premier chub waters and also held good roach, bream and perch populations too. Not any more though but I think this down to signals more than anything else. The sudden disappearance of big barbel on the Cherwell was going to be noticed first as they were very localised, whereas other species were quite evenly spread. For overall and long term damage the signals take some topping on both Cherwell and Windrush. The Windrush had a lot of chub and big dace but all that seems to thrive there now are crayfish and trout, which are generally stocked by Cotswold fly fishers. The trout that is...

Whatever the reason(s) the Thames Valley rivers seem to be among the worst hit by otters, signals, cormorants etc and all in all the future of these rivers as viable fisheries is bleak.

I walked a 2 mile stretch of the Thame a few weeks back - glorious sun and clear water, most of it no deeper than 4 foot - did not see a single fish of any type/size and as far as i know no report of otters. So although they are part of the problem, they are only part of it and, as Lee says in his excellent post, it ain't something we are going to win. We need to be honest most people have no idea what a barbel is never mind even care about them - in the conservation stakes mammals and birds are a long way ahead of fish, which are probably on a par with insects (excluding butterflies).
 
Hi men ,

Paul , a few years ago we had a go on that river , bumped into a few people walking the banks who told us they were making an area for otters , but were happy that they did not need to as there was sightings of them coming up into the weir pool , and otter prints found all around the bridge area .


Hatter
 
Is it really a matter of winning, (Paul)?? Or perhaps just getting some recognition for what is actually happening on so many rivers? Yes levels! and extraction! and silt! have an effect, so why not agree and look to improving this as well?? I -for one - don`t "blame" just want to now work together to find what is best for our rivers.
 
Quite agree Shaun but how many forum discussions have there been about levels or abstraction or silt? How many of those stupid e petitions have been created on such subjects? It's all otters, otters, otters, that's all anyone seems bothered about, not even cormorants get anywhere near as much stick and I'd wager they've taken far more fish.
 
Is it really a matter of winning, (Paul)?? Or perhaps just getting some recognition for what is actually happening on so many rivers? Yes levels! and extraction! and silt! have an effect, so why not agree and look to improving this as well?? I -for one - don`t "blame" just want to now work together to find what is best for our rivers.

Out of interest what actions would you like to see take place to 'improve' our rivers regarding Otters? As Rhys mentioned earlier we would be better off joining forces with the other environmental groups to improve our rivers with regards to abstraction, pollution, lack of fry recruitment etc so that our rivers can sustain healthy Otter populations. Alternatively you could carry on compiling a glut of evidence that Otters eat fish. That'll help. :rolleyes:
 
This is why I chose to get involved with the Barbel Society. An organisation that was at least trying to do something-not about the Otters specifically, but the habitat and recruitment etc. It requires funding and a great deal of effort-led predominately by Pete Reading.

This is the sort of projects the Society has got involved with:

The Barbel Society – Projects

I have been following this thread with great interest. I don't have any particularly new insights to share so haven't posted as yet but I have reflected that whilst people have perhaps come close to falling out a bit (understandable given it is a highly emotive subject) it's been an intelligently and well articulated debate with some great contributions from many members-and it's just the sort of discussion that's good to see on the forum. I know people have spoken of the demise of the forum and how FB is taking over but the way in which this thread has developed is not something I think you would see on FB.
 
I walked a 2 mile stretch of the Thame a few weeks back - glorious sun and clear water, most of it no deeper than 4 foot - did not see a single fish of any type/size and as far as i know no report of otters. So although they are part of the problem, they are only part of it and, as Lee says in his excellent post, it ain't something we are going to win. We need to be honest most people have no idea what a barbel is never mind even care about them - in the conservation stakes mammals and birds are a long way ahead of fish, which are probably on a par with insects (excluding butterflies).

I'm not sure what everyone means by "win". It's wrong to assume that all concerned about otters want a license to shoot them to be made available. What is needed is recognition that they are a major part of the decimation of many rivers and this will need to be addressed, along with other serious issues such as signals, extraction, poaching etc. by those with the authority to do so. I cannot see what is to be gained by merely stating we aren't going to win. One thing is certain, if the issues aren't highlighted then we definitely aren't going to get anywhere. I also think too much is made of so called "public opinion". Many seem to shrink away in fear of saying anything that might offend the all powerful "public". What are they going to do? Demand the government insists all anglers adopt an otter? As for the antis reading these boards and making hay with "negative" otter comments, don't be fooled into thinking that the public have much time for these fringe groups either. Angling is a great sport that does a lot of good and we should not be shrinking away in fear from public opinion when we highlight issues that threaten it.

Paul, I'm not surprised you didn't hear any repports of otters if the stretch was a s barren as you describe, I expect they've moved on to more lucrative stretches. Upper Thames experienced barbel anglers such as John Everard and Stewart Moss have first hand knowledge of the decline of that once brilliant fishery.
 
Alex, my point is that it isn't a single issue and if we see it as such we are not going to 'win' this. The notion of well stocked fisheries that can hold apex predators and a full range of flora and fauna is what we should be aiming for, which it seems is where this debate rightly is heading, I can recall serious concerns on another river with large barbel back in the early 90's over mink, nothing happened and the issue for me at the time was a decline in the overall stock of fish that could not have been down solely to mink.

As for the Thame i heard one otter report last year and i have been fishing it long time - i have never seen any evidence of them - so they are not in my view the only cause of any decline, if they are present at all. As for signals - well the chub are much larger than they have ever been.
 
Good point on the chub Paul, trouble is keeping a bait away fromt the signals long enough to give the chub a chance! I also suspect the perch grow big on them but, on the Cherwell at least, they have made fishing (for what little remains) virtually impossible
 
As I stated before Andrew, just a simple record of anglers sightings from various rivers would give the E.A (for one) more than they have at the moment. The "action" is exactly that, keeping records for the season and joining our records with various environmental organisations. You could even mention - when you see it - any pollution, low levels etc.This would help them too. If you would rather not then don`t. You already know afterall that Otters eat fish so well done you.
 
As I stated before Andrew, just a simple record of anglers sightings from various rivers would give the E.A (for one) more than they have at the moment. The "action" is exactly that, keeping records for the season and joining our records with various environmental organisations. You could even mention - when you see it - any pollution, low levels etc.This would help them too. If you would rather not then don`t. You already know afterall that Otters eat fish so well done you.

Keeping records of sightings/kills is action to help improve our rivers? How?! The EA are actively out there building Holts for Otters to live in!

This is why I chose to get involved with the Barbel Society. An organisation that was at least trying to do something-not about the Otters specifically, but the habitat and recruitment etc. It requires funding and a great deal of effort-led predominately by Pete Reading.

This is the sort of projects the Society has got involved with:

The Barbel Society – Projects

I have been following this thread with great interest. I don't have any particularly new insights to share so haven't posted as yet but I have reflected that whilst people have perhaps come close to falling out a bit (understandable given it is a highly emotive subject) it's been an intelligently and well articulated debate with some great contributions from many members-and it's just the sort of discussion that's good to see on the forum. I know people have spoken of the demise of the forum and how FB is taking over but the way in which this thread has developed is not something I think you would see on FB.

Good post Howard.
 
Back
Top