Anglers must call for realistic cormorant management

[trent.barbeler]

Dear All,

 

Cormorants?

 

Apologies as this is perhaps for the "older" contributor on AN. Bruno will know as will Mr Waller no doubt.

 

The "Archer's" on the radio. A radio "soap" about village country life. Its famous theme tune goes something like this in hum-a-long;

 

Dah dee dah, dah dah dee dah,.... dah dee dah dee dah dahhh, dah dee dah dee dah dee dah, didly dahdee dah dah........... (I bet Bruno's reading and huming at the same time)

 

The cormorant issue has been running for nearly as long as the Archers.

 

Still nothing's been done. Still our fish stocks get plundered. You can talk all you like, attend meeting after meeting, write papers, lobby MP's, whatever. Nothing has been resolved and our wild fish stocks remain threatened. That's the grim reality. Personally, I could care less who gets the problem solved. Bruno's mob in one corner or the heavyweight horizontal champions the CA in the other.

 

Bruno, can you please enlighten all here on the criteria needed to successfully obtain a license to cull cormorants? My granny's just had her shotgun license through and fancied unloading a "banderlero" or two in these birds direction. And no Mr Waller, granny is not a CA member just a Clint Eastwood fan, pancho, hat, cigar and all.

 

Regards,

 

Lee.

[Colin Brett]

No problem with culling these??

 

RUDDY DUCKS

 

There has been much controversy over the

threat of ruddy ducks to the white-headed

duck in Spain and DEFRA have announced

that a cull of ruddy ducks will take place in

England over the next few winters. Our

reservoirs Pitsford, Rutland and Hollowell all

hold significant numbers of these birds

from time to time and DEFRA are keen to

reduce them at these locations.

Discussions have been taking place for

some time on the practicalities and impacts

of shooting ruddy ducks. But as we go to

press this has still not been resolved.

If it does go ahead, Anglian Water wilt be

requiring the marksmen to be shooting in

defined areas, away from fishing, sailing or

[other recreational activity. The cull will also

[need to be planned so that there is no

I impact upon other species of birds and

English Nature will be advising on this. If

you want to know more, have a look at the

DEFRA web site.

 

Taken from the Anglian Water "Hooked" magazine.

 

Spain????? I assume our randy little Ruddy duck pop off on their hols to Spain and sh@g the @rses of the local birds?? What's new??

 

Colin

[fenboy]

This cormorants issue makes me decidely uneasy. Let me explain why...

 

There are cormorants galore in my area. But no shortage of fish. In fact I would suggest the fishing is better than at any time I have known it since I started fishing 38 years ago.

 

The people who lead the call to cull cormorants are those with vested interests - ie those who run fisheries with artificially high stocks of fish (so that useless saddos can believe they are more skilful than they actually are by catching a lot of fish).

 

The argument predator anglers have been using for years is that the mass of prey fish determines the mass of predators. Therefore, increased predation by cormorants should affect pike, zander and perch stocks. Not silver fish.

 

There's some bad arithmetic going on here. And there are also a lot of gullible anglers falling onto the cormorants-eat-fish-therefore-they-are-our-sworn-enemies bandwagon.

 

For heaven's sake, surely even the lowest form of intelligence can see what damage we are doing to angling's image by lusting for a bloodbath?

 

I'm getting a bit bored by saying this, but here we go again: cormorants need fish to survive. We need fish for a bit of fun.

 

Push for culls at your peril. You are alienating Mr and Mrs Average. Keep at it, and angling itself will be outlawed within 20 years. Mark my words, because by 2024 those words may come back to haunt you gun-toting, blinkered idiots.

[Jon Hedges]

Whilst agreeing with much of Fenboy's response, the last para is a bit strong.

 

However, we must consider our thoughts on the matter vs those of Joe Public. To us, Cormorants decimating fish stocks (if indeed they do) is a real concern. To the public at large however it is of no consequence. If a cull were approved to placate fishermen, the press articles that follow would cause more damge to fishing than any cormorant.

Whilst we may find amounts of fish taken from out lakes and rivers by these birds, at least we still have the opportunity to angle for what remains. If the public turn against angling (due to press coverage of a cull laid at the feet of angling) then we won't have the opportunity.

A natural balance usually occurs with these things. To (rather sadly) quote from Jurassic Park ... "Nature finds a way"

[Bruno Broughton]

trent.barbeler:

Apologies as this is perhaps for the "older" contributor on AN. Bruno will know as will Mr Waller no doubt.

Can't speak for Peter, Lee, but I always bow to the greater vision of youth. I gave up listening to The Archers several years ago, and I am impressed that such a youthful pup as you can actually recite the theme tune; I had forgotten it. Are you a secret fan? (or were you? - I think you just outed yourself).

 

[/QB]

Still nothing's been done. Still our fish stocks get plundered. You can talk all you like, attend meeting after meeting, write papers, lobby MP's, whatever. Nothing has been resolved and our wild fish stocks remain threatened. That's the grim reality. Personally, I could care less who gets the problem solved. Bruno's mob in one corner or the heavyweight horizontal champions the CA in the other.

 

Bruno, can you please enlighten all here on the criteria needed to successfully obtain a license to cull cormorants? .[/QB]

 

You mention 'our' fish stocks several times, which leads me to think that you must own or control a fishery. In that case, you are well placed to obtain a licence. If by 'our' you merely mean 'anglers'' then I have a problem with that, as you do. In stillwaters, the owner of the fishery owns the fish; in rivers, they are regarded as 'wild animals', belonging to no-one.

 

This point may seem minor nit-picking, but it is important because it is the basis of the legal position. In rivers, at least, it can be argued that as the fish belong to no-one, we (anglers) have no legal recourse to preventing a wild animal (cormorants) from eating another wild animal (fish). As we have no ownership of the fish, our concern is of no greater merit than that of the general public, most of whom seem perfectly content for cormorants to eat what they will. That is not the emotional position, of course, but it is the legal one.

 

"Still nothing has been done". Incorrect and dismissive. An awful lot has been done, paintakingly, by a number of people, of which I am one. I am not sure what would satisfy you, Lee, short of myself becoming a freelance cormorant shooter, roaming 'our' waters, culling cormorants to protect 'our' fish. Yes, I am old enough to remember the 'Rambo' movies... but wise enough to treat them as fiction.

 

What is your measure of 'something being done'? The eradication of cormorants in Britain? A 50% reduction in numbers across the UK? A cormorant-free zone around Nottingham? Cormorant numbers Europe-wide shot back to pre 1970 levels? These may or may not be on your wish list, but they just aren't going to happen, I'm afraid.

 

Or - as is the case - specific guidelines (endorsed by both the RSPB and English Nature), setting out, step-by-step, how to fill in a licence application. That took an awful lot of hard work, and to dismiss it as 'nothing' is demeaning and cheap.

 

It is NOT a 'licence to cull'. That doesn't exist in the UK, and nor will it, no matter what I or others do, or you may care to try. If you don't believe me, I invite you to try yourself to change the system. I have done that, in various ways, so I am afraid that I am not prepared to accept the easy 'they ought to' arguments.

 

The licence is a licence to control comorants at a specific site by shooting some of them as an aid to scaring others. I suspect that you haven't looked at the link

 

www.cormorants.info

 

that I posted earlier. If you had, you would have seen (under 'licences', then 'completing the form' and 'guidelines') exactly how to do it.

 

You can either accept my advice or not, of course. However - and to repeat myself - Government will not budge from its current position unless it receives a large number of licence applications. THAT is the ammunition that is required to move the issue on, and if fishery owners or tenants don't do so, angling's negotiating position to squeeze more from Government is untenable. It may not be how you or I would want it to be, but it is the reality.

 

Should you or anyone else want a copy of the booklet 'Protecting Your Fishery From Cormorants', please email me and I will send you a free copy (which includes the licence application notes).

 

[ 14. February 2004, 12:27 AM: Message edited by: Bruno Broughton ]

[fenboy]

Forget cormorants. They are only the tip of the iceberg.

 

I can reveal that the REAL threats to angling in my nekc of the woods are herons, kingfishers and eels. Let me explain.

 

HERONS love eels above all else. Forget nasty diseases, it is the eveil GREY PLAGUE that is responsible for decimating stocks of our beloved anguilla anguilla.

 

KINGFISHERS may look blue and cute but they are DEVASTATING stocks of small fish. Fry stand no chanc when confronted with their EVIL pointed beaks. Wipe them out before they EMPTY our fisheries.

 

OTTERS are the devils of the river. They EAT fish to survive, therefore they are every angler's enemy. Cuddly... furry... playful... forget that sly act. Did you know they eat 700 times their bodyweight in prime roach and bream every day? And they carry Smallpox, Foot and Mouth, Anthrax, Anorexia and Acne!

 

Kill 'em all, I say!

 

PS: My mate has just heard that ospreys could be next threat. Let's smash their eggs just in case...

[Bruno Broughton]

Fenboy

 

You are WAY off mark there, old son. So, herons, kingfishers & otters eat a few adult fish. Big deal - these fish are big enough to fight their own corner, I say.

 

What totally disses me is the murder of Our Baby Fish, cut down in their youth before they have even had the chance to get their fins over for the first time. Fish infanticide is a stain that bleeds across the sport of angling and threatens its very existance.

 

The culprits are... er, Other Fish. Yes, Other Fish eat the vulnerable eggs of Our Fish in their millions, and they have been known to eat the fry too. This slaughter goes unnoticed, and the victims' cries for help go unheeded. I hate Other Fish - they are scum, a slimey, devious, scheming bunch of aliens. I can reveal all: they are CARP, illegal immigrants that threaten Our Fish and our entire culture of sticking hooks into Our Fish.

 

I say: forget talking, campaigning and negotiating. That's for wimps. We know who the guilty are, and we demand that direct and terminal action is taken to protect Our Fish from Other Fish. I demand a carp cull. Now. Right now.

 

And God forgive you if it's not completed by breakfast.

[fenboy]

Bruno, you are so right. Carp are to blame for everything.

 

Yesterday morning I saw a carp blatantly - in broad daylight - eating all the other fish on the river.

 

As if that wasn't enough, it then climbed into its shiny new 4x4 and drove to the nearest town, where it claimed benefits for its extended family of 823.

 

On the way there, it mowed down an entire flock of English partridges... but there's no hope of ever bringing that carp to justice, because it can claim diplomatic immunity.

 

I blame the nasty Europeans, who introduced selective breeding of wild carp to produce a Master Race that have since colonised the continent.

 

It's a shame carp taste like s**t... otherwise we could organise a cull and eat them all.

[Leon Roskilly]

fenboy:

 

The argument predator anglers have been using for years is that the mass of prey fish determines the mass of predators. Therefore, increased predation by cormorants should affect pike, zander and perch stocks. Not silver fish.

The comparison between (say) pike and cormorants isn't valid.

 

If pike ate most of the prey fish in a water, they don't have the option to flap their wings, and as a population, relocate to a better feeding ground. (Though I'd like to see that!)

 

So evolution, over millions of years, has developed a biological strategy to ensure that pike never eat themselves out of their only home.

 

When the pike/prey ratio becomes imbalanced, more pike (now at a higher density compared to normal prey fish) get eaten by other pike.

 

Cormorants don't eat each other (Though I'd like to see that!).

 

Cormorants have the option of almost clearing a water, moving onto better pastures, then returning to the water when the larder has become restocked.

 

Tight Lines - leon

 

[ 14. February 2004, 07:21 AM: Message edited by: Leon Roskilly ]

[Bradford Angler]

these arguments for underlying support of cormorants from anglers . . confuse me . . . . however . . how do they justify their opening stance .. . I will put it down to lack of sleep . . general disorientation or typing after a full session on the ale . .

 

. . having seen three lakes made totally void of fish annually . . all stocked with silver fish (which are expensive ! and can not be stocked to the same saturation levels as "cheap as chips carp" for financial reasons. So Bio mass is not drawing the black death in this instance

 

our waters are now getting depleted each year, we can no nolonger keep shelling out on fish with the life expectancy of 1yr . . fingerlings do not get anglers on the bank they want fish around the 12oz mark . . these are hard to find . .

 

we might aswell support pollution then . . after all raw sewage into a river or stream greatly increase the nutrient and nitrate levels of the water . . theoretically making the water more fertile . . promoting life . . so what if is does in the short term remove all oxygen . . . .

 

lets all get on the right page . . eh ? . . cormorants eat fish ! DEFRA and it's ministers are supposed to "protect our native species". Once a water becomes "unmanageable" or financially a burden . . it is neglected by the angling community . . local trash moves in . . it becomes a doss area, fly tipping, polluted and a no go zone...

 

I am sure if I asked DEFRA for approval to stock a fish strain that could "possibly" cause so much damage and potentially wipe out a whole community and it's wildlife . . there would be a completely different stance !