• 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...

Teme Study

Jason Bean said:
I would say a lot has changed in rivers within the last 20 years, particularly in the south east.
Click to expand...

The changes on one particular river involving 2 stretches have happened in the last 5 years, its noticeable that both stretches are more rural than others parts nearby.
 
It's indisputable that barbel and otters CAN live in harmony (form their own 'eco-balance') e.g. Yorks Ouse, Wye, Lower Severn (maybe?), but I think the problem starts when otters are introduced into a small river. I think that will always be a recipe for disaster.. until a balance is reached, which may take 15-25yrs. O.ters won't travel to, and live in, an area that won't support them. They'd move on (as the young have to)
N.B.. I too have little faith in the likelihood of honesty and full disclosure from EA/gov sources. Remember the Hampshire Avon/multiple barbules/luncheon meat situation, and the underhanded removal of offal from meat...without any acceptance that that had been the cause. We've got a lot to thank 'Our Fred' (Bless him) for :D
 
I was recently told by a friend that the oplnion among Kennet barbel anglers was that 75% of the barbel had been taken by Otters,so I asked if dead or starving Otters had been seen as if they had killed that amount of the barbel population they would surely now be struggling to catch sufficient food.He agreed he had not heard of any but assumed they would have moved on to other rivers but surely the barbel numbers are down in all rivers so thls surely would mean they would suffer the same fate there.I personally do not doubt some barbel have fallen to Otters as have other species,but this concentration on the idea that all the problems are due to Otters alone reminds me of the panic years ago when Zander first began to show up in rivers and we were told this would be tne end of roach and all silver fish.It is all too easy to pin the blame for a problem on an easily visible reason which may only be one of many causes and miss the rest.
 
Fred Wilton said:
I was recently told by a friend that the oplnion among Kennet barbel anglers was that 75% of the barbel had been taken by Otters,so I asked if dead or starving Otters had been seen as if they had killed that amount of the barbel population they would surely now be struggling to catch sufficient food.He agreed he had not heard of any but assumed they would have moved on to other rivers but surely the barbel numbers are down in all rivers so thls surely would mean they would suffer the same fate there.I personally do not doubt some barbel have fallen to Otters as have other species,but this concentration on the idea that all the problems are due to Otters alone reminds me of the panic years ago when Zander first began to show up in rivers and we were told this would be tne end of roach and all silver fish.It is all too easy to pin the blame for a problem on an easily visible reason which may only be one of many causes and miss the rest.
Click to expand...

Imo otter are one of a myriad of problems our rivers face but could be the straw that broke the camels back.
 
Hi men

There was nothing wrong with the glorious river Windrush until otters turned up . Then the fish were smashed out of sight , chub then took a hit , and according to a couple of Oxford students doing a study for their university degree that led to a situation that allowed signal crayfish to get a massive foothold along its water course . The smaller rivers we tge ones that showed the problem up , its not the only problem , but you cant wrap it up any other way it a very big one .

Hatter
 
We lack the necessary empirical data to enable a genuine consensus to surface. Data that covers a meaningful period of time and a diverse range of rivers and environmental factors. It’s so difficult to find anchor points in the debate. It’s pretty clear to me that otters had a profound effect on the Kennet- the only river I can talk about with a degree of authority (or rather, personal experience). But I really don’t know if otters simply accelerated a decline that was already underway because of other factors impacting on recruitment. Without otters, perhaps the Kennet could have stumbled on for a few more years and maybe even had some chance to regenerate through intervention. In recent years I became very troubled by the sheer lifelessness of the river, save for the trout that were stocked. To balance that, there seemed to be certain stretches of the Kennet alive with silvers. It’s a muddled landscape. But what of the cycle of events, the sequencing?

One thing many or even most of us might agree on is the relatively fragile state of small rivers. It seems they are simply ill equipped to withstand even modest shifts in environmental or predation factors.

I have always maintained that until we begin to look forward, unite around a genuine consensus of understanding and then build from there- we will just go round in circles and won’t ever be in a position of being able to offer a rounded perspective of how and when intervention should occur.
 
It doesn't matter,even if it could be proven scientifically,without a shadow of doubt that otters have destroyed adult barbel populations,still nothing would be done. As was mentioned earlier,the ONLY people who care about barbel,are barbel anglers,a tiny proportion of the population

If we were to confront someone as high profile as Chris Packham and mentioned the plight of the barbel,he would just shrug his shoulders and say "that's nature I'm afraid"
 
Howard Cooke said:
We lack the necessary empirical data to enable a genuine consensus to surface. Data that covers a meaningful period of time and a diverse range of rivers and environmental factors. It’s so difficult to find anchor points in the debate. It’s pretty clear to me that otters had a profound effect on the Kennet- the only river I can talk about with a degree of authority (or rather, personal experience). But I really don’t know if otters simply accelerated a decline that was already underway because of other factors impacting on recruitment. Without otters, perhaps the Kennet could have stumbled on for a few more years and maybe even had some chance to regenerate through intervention. In recent years I became very troubled by the sheer lifelessness of the river, save for the trout that were stocked. To balance that, there seemed to be certain stretches of the Kennet alive with silvers. It’s a muddled landscape. But what of the cycle of events, the sequencing?

One thing many or even most of us might agree on is the relatively fragile state of small rivers. It seems they are simply ill equipped to withstand even modest shifts in environmental or predation factors.

I have always maintained that until we begin to look forward, unite around a genuine consensus of understanding and then build from there- we will just go round in circles and won’t ever be in a position of being able to offer a rounded perspective of how and when intervention should occur.
Click to expand...

Imo that's something that will never happen while there are anglers that refuse point blank to acknowledge that some (a lot) rivers have suffered terribly from otter predation, they must have their reasons for thinking that but as I don't know their rivers I cant comment on why.
 
Mark Mole said:
It doesn't matter,even if it could be proven scientifically,without a shadow of doubt that otters have destroyed adult barbel populations,still nothing would be done. As was mentioned earlier,the ONLY people who care about barbel,are barbel anglers,a tiny proportion of the population

If we were to confront someone as high profile as Chris Packham and mentioned the plight of the barbel,he would just shrug his shoulders and say "that's nature I'm afraid"
Click to expand...
Yep, at the end of the day otters are 'cuter' than barbel, so otters will win. There will always be those folk, inside and outside of the angling community, that say (or think) " I've never seen a partly eaten barbel carass, I've never seen an otter attack a barbel, I think otters look nice, they're pretty!...and anyway they've got just as much right to be where they are as barbel (who were also introduced) do". And, from that, will defend the presence of otters, wherever". That is the way it will always be IMO.
 
Graham Elliott said:
Otters do mass kill.

Just look at some of the garden ponds with multiple kills. They do have feeding frenzy times and will happily seek out the oil
richest part of fish.

And a family of Otters prior to the adults pushing youngsters away, could affect many miles of river.
Click to expand...

That may well be true but I thought we were talking natural venues here not garden ponds!

I also believe that each river is a unique ecosystem in its own right and to generalise across all our waterways is a mistake. My experiences are on small rivers local to me and the otter is quite clearly the chief culprit in the adult barbel demise. That is most definitely indisputable and only an ignorant idiot would suggest otherwise.
 
I don't know if Julian was including me in his comment about ignorant idiots,but even if he is I have no problem with that ,I have been called an idiot many times before by a great number of people.Proving anything indisputably is very difficult to achieve,especially as in this case with so many variables.With carp having a commercial value and being farmed in countries all over the world they are studied to a tremendous degree at great cost,whereas barbel are not,the work on barbel is mainly done by amateurs or worse still the EA
 
Fred Wilton said:
I don't know if Julian was including me in his comment about ignorant idiots,but even if he is I have no problem with that ,I have been called an idiot many times before by a great number of people.Proving anything indisputably is very difficult to achieve,especially as in this case with so many variables.With carp having a commercial value and being farmed in countries all over the world they are studied to a tremendous degree at great cost,whereas barbel are not,the work on barbel is mainly done by amateurs or worse still the EA
Click to expand...
Fred, certainly not!
It isn’t aimed at anyone in particular, just at those that refuse to accept that the otter can be a hugely problematic predator on smaller rivers.
 
With all due respect Fred, Barbel are studied probably more than any other species, especially in Europe where they are considered to be the indicator species of many European rivers due to their susceptibility to chemical and heavy metal pollution, people think the reason why barbel were stocked in the Severn were for the anglers benefit, yes it was plus point, but barbel were stocked in the severn in the 1950's, for the same reasons, as a long term indicator species, something the severn hadn't got at that time and bearing in mind the severn like other rivers had suffered heavy industry use and some pollution at that time as it was not long after the war.

In the early 70's myself and a some friends (as barbel anglers) got involved with Dr Peter Hunt of Liverpool University in a barbel population study on the river severn ( his paper is still available) Peter told us the true reasons for the Barbels stocking at that time, one of Peters main investigations was to asses the infestation of the Barbel by the parasite Pomphorhynchus Laevis (P.laevis), as this would indicate the heavy metal and chemical pollution levels on the Severn. Brown Trout and Chub suffer from the same infestation from this vile parasite, but not to the extent of Barbel, we were all horrified when Peter dissected the first Barbel in front of us and then witnessed the hundreds yellow grub like creature spew out onto the dissecting table in front of us from the Barbels stomach. Whilst Barbel appear to be a good host to P.Laevis and show no external visual signs of infestation, therefore in the short term they seem live with each other, the parasite can and does in some cases lead to the Barbels death if it burrows its way into the stomach wall and once again Bournemouth Uni are currently conducting a study on the parasite and its effect as most barbel in the country are infested with this creature. Even as we speak, there are various research programs going on by various universities, freshwater biologists and environmental groups in Europe monitoring the Barbels health and its environment.

Be in no doubt, if there had been a collapse in the Barbels population in any of the European rivers like some rivers have here, all manner of alarm bells would have sounded. Barbel in Europe are not stocked in their rivers so anglers can catch them, they are stocked for research and are stringently monitored.
 
Last edited:
Believe me Laurence I am not due respect from any angler,I just stumbled into angling in my late twenties had an idea and pursued it,I have great admiration for good anglers but would never claim to be one.My interest has sent me looking into various odd-ball areas over the years.I was interested to read that barbel were used to indicate the presence of heavy metals in rivers.Twenty or so years ago as I had no computer I asked a series of friends who did, to look up the minerals present in the vartous rivers we were fishing and in each case they came back to say they were blocked and not available I even contacted {through a friend} a woman who worked in the office for ICI's horticultural division,she too said the information was unavailable.I was not looking for heavy metals at all but came to the conclusion that as our drinking water came from these rivers there was something in the water the authorities did not want the public to know I thought it was probably mercury which had been used in seed dressings into the 1970's.I am not saying mercury might be partly responsible for the barbels decline,but there may be some other substance present which does them harm.
 
Fred Wilton said:
I was recently told by a friend that the oplnion among Kennet barbel anglers was that 75% of the barbel had been taken by Otters,so I asked if dead or starving Otters had been seen as if they had killed that amount of the barbel population they would surely now be struggling to catch sufficient food.He agreed he had not heard of any but assumed they would have moved on to other rivers but surely the barbel numbers are down in all rivers so thls surely would mean they would suffer the same fate there.I personally do not doubt some barbel have fallen to Otters as have other species,but this concentration on the idea that all the problems are due to Otters alone reminds me of the panic years ago when Zander first began to show up in rivers and we were told this would be tne end of roach and all silver fish.It is all too easy to pin the blame for a problem on an easily visible reason which may only be one of many causes and miss the rest.
Click to expand...
Fred-if the Kennet otters-and there are plenty of them, you're more likely to see otters than fish most of the time-were to rely only on barbel for sustenance, they certainly WOULD be starving or dead. They seem to use the river as a conduit, predating on birds & most likely crayfish & trout, plus carp from the lakes adjacent to the river that haven't yet been fenced off. They aren't the only problem with the Kennet, it's a river in deep trouble...but they are a problem. Maybe not for much longer though barbel-wise due to the lack of them!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top