• 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...

Otters again

The fact is on certain rivers Barbel make up alot of the Otters diet due to large numbers being present..Unfortunately thats not the case now because the large numbers of Barbel have now gone so the Otter will move on to another food source..In the end there will not be much of anything left due to mature fish stocks being diminished..As for the point of nature rebalancing itself well that remains to be seen and lets cross our fingers and hope that this is indeed the case..I dont like whats happening but i do recognise that theres nothing more anyone can do so its simply a case of make the best out of whats left..I just hope that some anglers on here dont see their local rivers become the next problem because believe me if it does you will be singing a different tune..;)
 
Just a copy & paste job,

but concerning Loddon anglers worst fears.

Wokingham Borough has been busy....

Wokingham Borough Council has managed to deliver a large number of biodiversity enhancements in the last 5 years including 3.5ha of new wet woodland, 7ha of new wildflower-rich grassland at Sindlesham Meadows and 6ha of new reedbeds at various sites. In addition to this we have created 19 new ponds and restored 9 old ponds, installed 19 barn owl pole boxes and constructed 10 artificial otter holts. Indeed evidence that otters are continuing to thrive on the River Loddon has emerged only in the last year. Surveys in 2008 found fresh footprints and spraints* on the river between Swallowfield and the A327 at Arborfield. Then in 2009 further surveys found spraints on the river north of the A327. However, most tantalisingly a local fisherman reported seeing an otter and 3 cubs at Dinton Pastures this autumn. Although it is almost impossible to know for sure that this was an otter family (rather than the much more common mink) we are fairly sure that otters are now using the park.’ (Reference WBC website)
 
Chris,

do you have a link to where you found this information?? Have been scouring the site for a while and cannot find anything newer than the 2005/2006 biodiversity action plan report.

I would appreciate direction to this latest update as I have a Loddon Consultative meeting on Thursday and would like to raise the issue with WBC who had stated they were doing no work to further encourage otters since the work they did up to 2005, it is felt that the Loddon can not support further otters.

There have been at least 2 otter groups in the Loddon since 2003, probably longer, at which time WBC had installed 8 artificial holts, these are natural migrants by the way and have not been released into the local environment from captivity. Consulting with NE and the Otter Trust, it is understood that at 28miles long the 2 known family groups plus one on the Blackwater would not allow further migration into the area.

Reports remain very rare, maybe 4 or 5 sightings per year in the whole catchment and so far there has not been a problem reported with regards fish deaths or corpses found on local rivers or stillwater fisheries........There also remains a very, very healthy eel population.........

I wonder, looking at the evidence that has been gathered in this thread so far, if the rivers with problems tie in very closely with the release of captive bred otters, i.e. East Anglia, the Great Ouse, Avon and Stour and upper Thames......................it does seem like a massive co-incidence!!! Where rivers have been naturally re-polulated, the predator/prey relationship, territorial rules, etc are more applicable??
 
Here ya go.

http://www.earleyenvironmentalgroup.co.uk/newsletter/Newsletter_March10.asp

Yes what you say seems to support the 'balanced' environment for them. Also as appreciated, this is a pretty built-up area, so road deaths will be fairly common to help 'manage' their numbers. Many otters that get hit, most probably won't be seen, as they'll manage to slink off somewhere quieter to die, if they are able.
You are lucky, eels above Bedford are rare as hens teeth.
 
A problem with the burgeoning otter population is that it is not apparent, (apart from the anglers who are directly affected), for joe public to see the damage caused to fish stocks. There's a parallel case with domestic cats. Very seldom does the public witness domestic cats killing mammals and birds, but they do, to the tune of millions a year. It's a case of out of sight out of mind. Cats are seen as cuddly animals but they are very efficient killing machines and most of the time, kill not to eat. I use the cat as an example to try and demonstrate that anglers are really up against the public's perception. The public are just starting to wake up to dwindling ocean fish stocks only because it directly affects them in terms of availability and price. Do you think that the non-angling fraternity bother about river fish stocks? Not a chance unless it affects them.
 
When i lived in the Midlands and used to fish the lower Severn i often used to pass a fishery called Moorlands..The sign outside said something like "Moorlands fishery,the future of fishing"..That statement might well turn out to be true the way alot of rivers are heading..:(
 
This whole issue really is very sad and vexed isn't it? As usual, it has got us all snapping and snarling at each others heels, which solves nothing. At best we have aired our views...again :rolleyes:, but we know that also will get us nowhere.

Paul has pointed out some undeniable truths as ever, giving us all pause for thought, and again, there is certainly enough passion to go around. But once more, there seems no way of arriving at a middle ground, no sign of a discussed and debated consensus that would point the way forward on this contentious and emotive subject.

I suppose that would seem not too surprising, considering the percieved span of the gulf between the camps. We have Paul at one end, saying (I think) that we should do or say nothing (on the grounds that it is childish selfishness to wish to protect what we have, and possibly counter productive to try) , and at the other end those who secretly (or perhaps not so secretly) harbour thoughts of massacring every otter in sight (on the grounds that they are to blame for the whole problem)

However, I feel certain that between those extremes, there are an awful lot of people who would SEEM to be at odds...until you break down and analyse their feelings on this.

(1)Are there many out there who REALLY blame the otters themselves for this situation? I seriously doubt it!

(2)Are there many who would actually condone killing otters, or see it as a reasonable solution? I doubt that very much.

(3)Are there many who do not believe that the otter is an indigenous species, with every right to be in our waters? ( with the possible proviso that their current numbers would have been even more of a 'right', as it were, had that situation arisen naturally...as, given time and improved habitat, it undoubtedly would have done)

(4)Are there many who do not understand that the REAL problem and threat to our hobby (and so much more than just our hobby) is the dreadful and steadily declining state of our waterways and environment in general. That we MUST deal with the difficult issues and problems we have created for ourselves soon, before it is too late? With the possible exception of those blinkered few in denial, who think that because they can catch a couple of fish whenever they wish that all is well in the world, I would think not.

(5)Are there many, if they think deeply and honestly about it, who believe that introducing large numbers of otters at this time was a good and well researched idea? Are there many who truly believe that at a time when our environment, and certainly our rivers, were in serious need of genuineand urgent improvement (especially where the fish stocks were in dire trouble because of pollution, abstraction, habitat degredation and the ravages of destructive alien species) was REALLY a good plan? Who do not see that the introduction of these otters was anything more than an ill timed operation conceived by a few idealists, and encouraged, aided and abetted by certain govenment departments/quangoes who saw this as a golden opportunity to offer up to an increasingly sceptical public the 'proof':rolleyes:that their lies and false claims of 'improving rivers' was actually showing results...'proof' in the form of a universally loved 'cuddly, furry toy'...that hopefuly would survive long enough to see them through their term in office....

If, as I suspect, most of us can see the point/truth in at least the majority of those questions, that even those they don't go along with wholeheartedy are not TOO far off the mark, then in truth, we have quite a lot of common ground here.....don't ya think?

Can we not at least give thought to supporting those who are collating evidence on the scale of the problem, who are at least TRYING to get something moving, to initiate further research and investigate possible solutions to the problem? Do we have to have a barrage of negative, destructive and demoralising comments every time someone dares to suggest any action of any sort on this issue...they are not all self serving, egotistical monsters you know, there are some genuine, well meaning hardworking unsung heroes out there. Think about it.

Cheers, Dave.
 
Do you think that the non-angling fraternity bother about river fish stocks? Not a chance unless it affects them.

I agree with that statement Jim, as I have said before on this forum that the public perception is Otters are cute warm and cuddley, and fish are cold wet and slimey, so it will always be Otters.
There is a danger with too much anti otter, and talks of culling that this will turn opinion firmly aginst anglers, and play in to the hands of those who would have us banned.
I feel that what has happened has happened and we have to try and live with it while doing our best to prevent any further introductions.
 
David G,
nothing particularly unreasonable in that post. However, I suspect that there is possibly one other group to add. I wonder if the total lack of an apex predator in many areas has left anglers with exaggerated, unreasonable and possibly quite unnatural expectations of their fishing and fish. It's no real surprise that those that fall into that camp are likely to feel particularly aggrieved.

For others nothing much has changed and they may well not see what all the fuss is about. Traditional coarse angling migration from north to south may change a little for a period. I suspect that it's already started with the Trent, it's obvious that plenty of southern based barbel anglers are travelling to it. I seriously doubt that was the case ten years or so ago. In time the Trent will change again and some other area will benefit from this angling migration.

These periodic cycles have long been a feature of UK fishing. Thirty years of fishing has shown me many fluctuations. In the eighties I wanted to go to Ireland and the Trent, by the late nineties I wouldn't have thanked anyone for a trip to either. Another ten to fifteen years on and the Trent is again top of the agenda. In the late eighties/early nineties, mainly thanks to John Wilson, I really wanted to give the Wensum a go. More recently, I'd have loved a stab at the huge barbel that once seemed so incredibly common on the Great Ouse. My local, the Swale, just plods along in the same old fashion. Some years are better than others, some years show increases or decreases certain species of fish but nothing much changes overall.
 
The point is Dave, as Paul's post highlighted, a large number of otters were not reintroduced 'at this time'. A small number were reintroduced from between the early 80's and 1999, and no more after this, that's nearly 12 years without any new introductions.
They have since spread 'naturally' producing the current numbers, making this more of a 'right' as you state in your third point.

There seems to be this collective fury on here, against all these supposed do-gooders, releasing relentless hoards of mad rabid otters on our unsuspecting fisheries, when this is clearly not the case.

With otters down to near extinction, reintroduction was the best way forward, I'd imagine, before the lack of genetic diversity wiped them out entirely. Fish on the other hand can be bred and restocked far more easily than otters, so I guess the case of the otter was, at the time, more pressing.

Perhaps now they have almost recovered fully(the otter trust has been officially closed now because of this, by the way), the EA, NE etc can concentrate more on improving fish stocks.
 
There were many otters re-introduced into areas not mentioned on this report, as they were released without the knowledge of the riparian landowners.
If they have only released only approx 150 animals, well they are breeding like rabbits then!
Funny how the Otter Trust only last year decided to make an announcement to the public that the reintroduction/captive breeding programme was closed, as it had been a total success. Why wait ten years to announce something that had been agreed on, a decade previous. I don't believe them, this joint statement is just there to pacify the likes of us anglers.
 
And maybe these stories of unrepentant and unreported otter reintroductions, are there just to gain support for the otter hating brigade?
 
Isn't the point Ray that despite hunting the otter was able to maintain a sustainable population back then and that dieldrin was the straw that broke the camels back and led to the wiping out of otters throughout much of the country?

Regarding the number of otters reintroduced, I would be amazed if it really was only 150 animals. To have repopulated so much of the country so quickly would defy logic bearing in mind the stated average lifespan, size of litters etc.
 
Last edited:
There is some really good discussion going on now.

David, great, well balanced post, I agree with just about all of it with the exception of point 5. I don't really belive that there has been a political program of using otters to promote the condition of rivers. I think that the whole bio-diverse range of plants, animals, fish, water and bird life is what is being used to demonstrate the health of the environment. I do think there is a section of the angling community who is using the otter part of this bio-diverse range to beat in particular the EA, where it is actually Natural England which has been the driving force together with the Otter Trust.........otherwise spot on, thanks for summising things in such a balanced way.

I have learned a lot the last few weeks and have turned from "oh no, not another otter discussion" to actually listening and taking onboard some other points of view.................that's got to be good for me........

One clear thing to point out, I am assured that there has been no importantion of otters to this country, all re-introductions were from native species bred in captivity.

Chris, to correct you a little, the Otter Trust last year closed it's facility which it had been using for the last ten years you care for orphaned and injured otters which were re-released, it has not satt empty for ten years and it is no secret that they have been caring for otters. This is one of the factors that led to the RSPCA stating it would be kinder to euthenase future orphaned cubs or injured otters. Having no otter trust facility to take the animals to, the RSPCS is a little scuppered, animal hospitals will charge the RSPCA a lot of wonga to look after animals they bring..........
 
'Otter numbers have increased in recent years but there are still only around 8,000 otters in the UK and they remain an endangered species.' (International Otter Survival Fund)
Well that's amazing, from being almost extinct 25 years ago, then releasing approx 150 over a twelve year period, to a whopping 8,000 in twenty years!
And they're still endangered? Get away.
 
The Eurasian Otter is not classified as "endangered" any more, they are actually classified as "near threated"which is 2 categories above endangered, vulnerable being the next step down the list..........

Some more interesting facts:

The Eurasian otter live in a wide variety of aquatic habitats, including highland and lowland lakes, rivers, streams, marshes, swamp forests and coastal areas independent of their size, origin or latitude (Mason and Macdonald 1986). In Europe they are found in the brackish waters from the sea level up to 1,000 m in the Alps (Ruiz-Olmo and Gosalbez 1997) and above 3,500 m in the Himalayas (Prater 1971) or 4,120 m in Tibet (Mason and Macdonald 1986). In the Indian sub-continent, the Eurasian otters occur in cold hill and mountain streams. During summer (April - June) in the Himalayas they may ascend up to 3,660 m. These upward movements probably coincide with the upward migration of the carp and other fish for spawning. With the advent of winter the otters come down to lower altitudes (Prater 1971). In a study conducted in Thailand in Huai Kha Khaeng where the Eurasian, smooth-coated and small-clawed otters live sympatrically, Kruuk et al. (1994) found that the Eurasian otters used rapidly flowing upper parts of the river. In Sri Lanka the Eurasian otter was live in the headwaters of all the five river systems but not in the estuaries (de Silva 1996).

In most parts of its range, its occurrence is correlated with bank side vegetation showing importance of vegetation to otters (Mason and Macdonald 1986). Otters in different regions may depend upon differing features of the habitat, but to breed, they need holes in the river bank, cavities among tree roots, piles of rock, wood or debris. The Eurasian otters are closely connected to a linear living space. Most portion of their activity is concentrated to a narrow strip on either side of the interface between water and land (Kruuk 1995). Otter distribution in coastal areas especially the location of holts, is strongly correlated with the presence of freshwater (Kruuk et al. 1989, Beja 1992).

Within the group home range, shared by resident adult females, each had her own core area. Resident males had larger home ranges in more exposed parts of the coast which overlapped with other males and with at least two female group ranges. Male and female transients moved through group ranges, relegated to less favoured holts, habitat and food. In freshwater home ranges are longer for both sexes (Kruuk 1995). Erlinge (1969) suggested that males were hierarchical and territorial, influenced by sexual factors, while female ranges were influenced by food and shelter requirements of the family group. Green et al. (1984) and Kruuk (1995) found that adult males spent most of their time along the main rivers, whereas adult females occupied tributaries or lakes, as they did in Austria (Kranz 1995). Rosoux (1995) found no sexual differences in habitat utilization and considerable overlaps in range. Young animals usually occupied peripheral habitat, but Green and Green (1983) found differences between immature and mature young males, the later having access to all available habitat and the other restricted to marginal habitat, supplemented by visits to the main river when vacant, temporally or spatially. While males generally have larger ranges than females in the same habitat, sizes vary according to the type and productivity of the habitat, and methods of measuring ranges vary from study to study.

Like most Lutra species, fish is the major prey of Eurasian otters sometimes exceeding more than 80% of their diet (Erlinge 1969, Webb 1975, Ruiz-Olmo and Palazon 1997). In addition to fish a whole range of other prey items have been recorded in their diet in variable proportions. These include aquatic insects, reptiles, amphibians, birds, small mammals, and crustaceans (Jenkins et al. 1980, Adrian and Delibes 1987, Skaren 1993). In a study conducted in Sri Lanka, Silva (1996) reported that the overall diet of the Eurasian otters consisted of 81.2% of crab, 37.5% fish and 8.7% frog. In addition to these the diet also included small quantities of water snakes, birds, small mammals and insects.

The percentage of crab in the diet of the Eurasian otters in Sri Lanka varied from 72% to 85%, and fish from 25-31%. There was significant seasonal variation in the diet in different habitats. The relative importance of fish in the diet was significantly higher in the reservoirs and lakes than the rivers and streams. Crabs were more important to otters inhabiting streams than those inhabiting rivers and lakes. Crabs were eaten more than fish during the monsoon (de Silva, 1997). However, in Huai Kha Kheng, Thailand 76% of the spraint had fish, 64% amphibians and 7% crab (Kruuk et al. 1994). The Eurasian otter is capable of taking fish as large as 9 kg (Chanin 1985), however, many studies in Europe have revealed that the fish consumed by the Eurasian otters are relatively small with a median length of 13 cm (Kruuk 1995).

The Eurasian otter is largely solitary and the adult otters tend not to associate with other adults except for reproduction. The family group of mother and offspring is the most important unit of otter society. In Shetland, where several adult animals used the same stretch of coast, encounters between adults were rare (Kruuk 1995) and the species was strikingly non-social. Kranz (1995) found evidence of social group formation beyond the occasional associations of two or more family groups, which suggests that under some circumstances otters of all ages and sexes may form temporary mutually tolerant gatherings.

In most of its range the Eurasian otter is predominantly nocturnal (Green et al. 1984). The exception is Shetland, where otters were entirely diurnal (Kruuk 1995). Green et al. (1984) found that activity was largely circumscribed by the solar rhythm so that the duration of activity varied through the year with night length. The reverse situation was found in Shetland with activity restricted by the day length (Kruuk 1995). Some workers have found a break in activity in the middle of longer nights or days and single peak around midnight or midday in shorter nights or days, although up to four activity periods per night has been recorded. Kruuk (1995) links otter activity to that of prey species, with the favoured marine species more vulnerable in daylight and those in freshwater easier to catch at night. In coastal habitats, tidal patterns influence otter activity, with significant preference shown for feeding at low tide, both in Shetland and on the Scottish west coast (Kruuk 1995).

The Eurasian otter attains sexual maturity at around 18 months in males and 24 months in the case of females, but in captivity it is usually 3 to 4 years (Reuther 1991). They are non-seasonally polyoestrous (Trowbridge 1983), mating in captivity has been observed at all times of the year (Reuther 1999). The gestation period is approximately 63-65 days, the litter size varies from 1 to 5, and the life expectancy is around 17 years (Acharjyo and Mishra 1983).
 
Apparently , they rarely live beyond the age of 4, which was one factor which exagerated the speed of thir demise in the fifties.........
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top