• 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...

The fishery predation survey

Interesting points Joe and certainly food for thought. I appreciate the difficulty in gaining hard evidence and I certainly wasn't referring to you personally as having an agenda as you clearly hold a balanced view. There are definitely aspects of shooting that can be improved but it's important both pro and anti shooting agendas are balanced, although that is seldom the case.
Chris Packham is rabidly anti shooting as can be expected when he describes us all as psycopaths
 
Alex Gowney said:
Interesting points Joe and certainly food for thought. I appreciate the difficulty in gaining hard evidence and I certainly wasn't referring to you personally as having an agenda as you clearly hold a balanced view. There are definitely aspects of shooting that can be improved but it's important both pro and anti shooting agendas are balanced, although that is seldom the case.
Chris Packham is rabidly anti shooting as can be expected when he describes us all as psycopaths
Click to expand...

Thank's Alex.

Yes those comments by Chris Packham were very unfortunate and sadly undermine his case about driven grouse shooting. The problem shooting has is it all to often seems to get lumped together by some. Some brilliant conservation work has been achieved by grey partridge shoots in the UK, conservation work has benefited a whole range of rare/declining farmland species not just grey partridge. It's a great shame when that gets tarred with the same brush as modern day commercial driven grouse shooting.
 
Joe Fletcher said:
Interesting reading about Scotland's disappearing raptor's ?

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...appearing-raptors-birds-prey-glorious-twelfth

I see also the National trust are having a vote on whether to ban all hunting on there land ?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4807448/All-hunting-set-banned-National-Trust-land.html
Click to expand...

There is a credible school of thought which theorises that Golden Eagle expansion into the uplands of Northern England is prevented because the grouse shooting estates of southern and eastern Scotland act as a 'firewall'.

Eagles fledging from the highlands and western isles looking to establish their own territories get drawn onto the grouse moors because the seeming abundance of grouse and to an extent mountain hares (although they are now being culled on many grouse moors) and think they have found the perfect place to settle.

Hence the Golden Eagle is now extinct in England, everyone believed that the last remaining male in Riggindale would eventually be joined by a mate coming down from Scotland, but after 12 years on his own he kicked the bucket. Quite sad really.
 
The great shame really is that both pro and anti shooting factions can do a lot for wildlife of all species but the reality is that both camps generally put their opposition to each other before the welfare of the wildlife. Opponents of pheasant shoots seldom admit the good the habitat retained for pheasants does for many species, not least many endangered butterfly species. Their main gripe seems to be that people actually enjoy shooting rather than any particular concern for what's being shot. And maybe the shooters, and I am guilty of this myself, demand incontrovertible proof of any wrongdoing rather than accepting it does go on and dealing with it.
 
Just an aside to this. Why are the restrictions on lead shot not applicable to moorland grouse shooting? Surely, the associated pollution will work its way into upland rivers and therefore impact on the flora and fauna along the course of such waterways?
 
Anthony Pearson said:
Just an aside to this. Why are the restrictions on lead shot not applicable to moorland grouse shooting? Surely, the associated pollution will work its way into upland rivers and therefore impact on the flora and fauna along the course of such waterways?
Click to expand...

Good question. Scotland probably use logic more than England in that lead can't be used over wetlands. England's rules are you can't shoot wildfowl with lead. So if a duck comes over a partridge drive you can't shoot at it unless you have lead substitute cartridge in the chamber. Or you can quickly change it of course...
 
Anthony Pearson said:
Just an aside to this. Why are the restrictions on lead shot not applicable to moorland grouse shooting? Surely, the associated pollution will work its way into upland rivers and therefore impact on the flora and fauna along the course of such waterways?
Click to expand...

That's a very good question Anthony, there also an issue so far as drinking water in concerned.

The Lead Action Group recommended that last year that the use of lead shot be phased out full stop - the evidence for that recommendation was very strong in my opinion. Did you know an estimated 40,000 wildfowl a year still die from lead poisoning in the UK?

The outgoing Defra Minister Liz Truss had the opportunity to act and take up the recommendations of the LAG (which is what is was set for), but she caved into to pressure from the certain factions in the shooting industry, notably the Countryside Alliance.

The chair of the Lead Action Group, John Swift who for many years was the Director of BASC had this to say on another forum earlier this week:

Liz Truss, after long delay but somewhat hastily on the day she was being sacked and cleared her desk, took the narrow view (which was politically convenient for her) that our Lead Ammunition Group report "did not provide 'evidence of proof of causation' linking possible impacts of lead ammunition with sizes of bird population in England".....there is indeed good scientific evidence for population level impacts on waterfowl populations, which is unquestionably true; and on the basis of the precautionary principle I say it must be taken seriously. (It could well be that there are population impacts for raptors and scavenger species too. But that's another story.)..... Liz Truss was being blatantly political.
 
I've had a look at the facebook page the last few days and the comments have been interesting.

I still find it difficult to understand what the survey is about? after reading the facebook page it gets more confusing...well for me it does.

in first instances anyone peed off with otter predation on there fishery river or lake would think this project is about doing something about it...which we all know is pretty much impossible unless you fence it off. but the main talking point of the project is about informing anglers that otter predation is not the problem its the state of the rivers that's the problem? yes we know that? so why count otters then when we know they've successfully established themselves throughout the country.

so the way I see it is the facebook page is good for "teaching" less informed anglers about the problems rivers face.

but the survey thing is perhaps a way of drawing anglers in to what they want to achieve. I don't know whether there is a running total for the survey or any time limit but be interesting to see the outcomes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top