Otter Reintroductions

[Elton]

I'm sure I've seen mention on here of actual facts regarding otter reintroductions, and the fact that the few there were were minimal and quite some time ago. Does anyone know where I can find such facts, rather than perpetuated media myths?

 

A quick search found this thread on Wild About Britain, where one person mentions 117 introductions over the whole course of the programme in the UK. A programme which apparently ended in 1999. I'm inclined to believe that what he's said is true, but would be grateful if somebody could steer me in the right direction.

 

tia,

 

Elton

[arbocop]

Click here.

 

It identifies the 2004 numbers of otters in the entire UK - 12, 900 in 2004. Compare that to the 36,950 mink.

 

I read somewhere else (I'll find it) that identified how many are in England and Wales, as at least 70% of the 12, 900 will be Scottish.

 

Thats really is not very many. I have no data on intriductions, but I'm sure someone will.

 

Update click here there is a very lengthy report identifying introductions in the last decade. They are generally only ten or less in the last 20 years in each region.

Edited April 21, 2010 by arbocop

[Anderoo]

Worms is your man - he provided all that info a while back, but I can't remember which topic(s). I seem to recall a number of 117 too, mostly in East Anglia I think. And that it stopped in about 1999.

 

Worms...?

[watatoad]

I think Anderoo is right about it being worms I just had a quick look and came up with these links.

 

http://www.gofishing.co.uk/Angling-Times/S...-otter-problem/

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6742033.stm

 

http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/news/116658.aspx

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/142...d-increase.html

 

http://norfolkanglers.co.uk/naca-general-n...-ea-and-ne.html

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/m...ack-584630.html

[PatrickALeigh]

No, 117 is not the true amount..... 117 was the figure published by the Otter Trust and is taken as gospel by those who wish to quote the number, it does not take into account releases performed by other wildlife groups either, such as the VW trust from the west country.. Natural England, WWF etc like to publish this figure though ... however, the total number released will never be truly known due to clerical errors and paperwork issues.. Oh, and not forgetting the general mis-information and research prior and during the releases.

 

Too few sites used as survey locals at the start of the project and 20 years of assumptions and still limited research data was only ever going to give a figure in favour of the research rather than actuals....

 

A quick search of paperwork from 2002 will give you a brief idea of the numbers.. but again, very grainy with the 'actual' numbers..

 

For instance and I quote " At LEAST 99 releases into East Anglia"

 

I have got all the other numbers in emails and paperwork in my office as part of some research and 'fact' finding for other parties and if you are interested in it Elton then drop me an email.

 

Oh and before anyone starts.. I like Otters and believe they should be in the wild, however, this badly flawed project has created issues for the environment we enjoy in terms of problems for fish, other mammals, birds and the Otters themsleves...

 

I'll leave you with a direct quote from the 2009 otter survery of bedfordshire written by the author of the report for the local BAP (biodiversity action plan)

"As can be seen in the discussion a number of otter signs and animals were

recorded during 2008 and 2009 from areas outside the scope of this survey and

from areas where there is no obviously good habitat. It is these animals that are

of greater interest as they indicate a potential expanding population and use (or

re use?) of new areas. Vermin records for the 16th and 17th centuries indicate the

capture of otters from all over the county including areas where they were not

thought to occur in the previous surveys. Is the discovery of animals a long way

from the expected habitats an indication that the Bedfordshire population is

reaching its carrying capacity and therefore animals are having to subsist in suboptimal

habitats? If this is the case it is likely that there will be an increase in

conflicts between otters and fishermen as the animals are forced to venture

further and encounter the easy pickings that well stocked fishing lakes can

provide. This will particularly be the case in the Ouse area where fish numbers in

the river are declining"

 

guess what? at least 3 of the East Anglian releases were in areas that Otters already habitated... missed by the surverys, but known to be there and spotted frequently by anglers in the early 80's.... but hey, the experts new best and created competition and welfare neglect because they thought they were doing the right thing..... Sometimes, they need to co-operate a little more with those who might just know more than them?

[arbocop]

guess what? at least 3 of the East Anglian releases were in areas that Otters already habitated... missed by the surverys, but known to be there and spotted frequently by anglers in the early 80's.... but hey, the experts new best and created competition and welfare neglect because they thought they were doing the right thing..... Sometimes, they need to co-operate a little more with those who might just know more than them?

 

Sometimes, they need to co-operate a little more with those who might just know more than them? Who would that be? Anglers are passionate, but they are not fishery scientists. I give you a quote from Dr Bruno Broughton, independent fisheries consultant.

 

This process has got to lead somewhere and have a practical outcome. Anglers need to help collect hard evidence of specific problems affecting fish stocks. That evidence then needs to be investigated seriously and unbiasedly.

 

Referring to your evidence - it's highly unlikely that otter populations present in the 80's will still be around in 2000 if there is - as you said - insufficient food resource, road kill, indirect poisoning with heavy metals etc. Also why would they lie about numbers? The more they have the better they can demonstrate their success. Also, who is breeding all these otters?

 

The thing is, anglers are barking on about this, but I don't think there is any evidence to say that otters are harming fish stocks. We bark when it is big fish, but in terms of a healthy fishery, loads of big fish does not indicate a healthy fishery. What we are barking about is that we don'ty get the opportunity to catch big fish. That's not really a good reason environmentally speaking.

 

Generally, I would say that fish stocks are higher now than they have been in years. Fish stocks are often reported (by anglers) as being in decline, but when there is an EA fish survey they find loads. There are exceptions of course. Many rivers ahve suffered pollution and over abstraction, and canalisation. This will ahev finsihed off far mroe rivers than any otter 'problem'.

 

My local River Kennet has no otters. Yet everyone is still ranting about the barbel stocks 'not being as they were'. However, Reading and District Angling Club forum identifies a comment by a member that he was fishing and the EA came along electrofishing. Whislt he was slightly narked, he was interested to note that three double figure barbel popped up from his swim. He had no idea that they were there - he'd had no bites.

 

Just because we are not catching them it does not mean they are not there. Also, just because a barbel has been found (why is it always barbel or carp?) partly devoured by an otter, we have no idea whether it was dead or dying beforehand. It's actually highly likely. I can't recall the number of times I've seen a barbel gasping in the river, but it's a considerable number.

 

June 17th last year a 6lb barbel came tumbling down from upstream. I tried to catch it in my net to revive it but it was gone. I went upstream later and spoke to an angler - 'oh just the one, about 6lb' he said. Now it's highly likely that that barbel did not survive, and I would say that this happens much more often than we think, or admit to.

 

What I'm saying is that I think we should provide hard scientific evidence to back up our claims. Barking about big barbel, or big carp with a name does not support an argument - it just identifies how passionate we are about our sport. We need to be able to say that the fishery and river or lake habitat is being harmed. You do not measure the health of a fishery by the number and size of fish one can catch.

 

I reinforce my previous comments - 12, 900 otters is not a sutainable number. This is 2004 figures, but assuming that they have increased by 20% (unlikely) there would be 15, 400. Hardly overrun by them are we?

 

Who has seen one?

[PatrickALeigh]

Sometimes, they need to co-operate a little more with those who might just know more than them? Who would that be? Anglers are passionate, but they are not fishery scientists. so unless you hold a phd you can not make a valid comment from 40 years of country life especially when area specific? I give you a quote from Dr Bruno Broughton, independent fisheries consultant.

 

This process has got to lead somewhere and have a practical outcome. Anglers need to help collect hard evidence of specific problems affecting fish stocks. That evidence then needs to be investigated seriously and unbiasedly. They are and I believe after last weeks meeting, it is

 

Referring to your evidence - it's highly unlikely that otter populations present in the 80's will still be around in 2000 if there isI actually referred to Otters present in the mid 80's and more introductions took place into those areas.. not required and most certainly would have led to welfare issues for the existing creatures as they look to gain territory - as you said - insufficient food resource, road kill, indirect poisoning with heavy metals etc. Also why would they lie about numbers? same reason they lied about contacting fisheries and angling clubs prior to release.. because they had no concerns for anything other than the otterThe more they have the better they can demonstrate their success. Also, who is breeding all these otters?

 

The thing is, anglers are barking on about this, but I don't think there is any evidence to say that otters are harming fish stocks. We bark when it is big fish, but in terms of a healthy fishery, loads of big fish does not indicate a healthy fishery. What we are barking about is that we don'ty get the opportunity to catch big fish. That's not really a good reason environmentally speaking.no evidence? you're having a laugh surely?

 

Generally, I would say that fish stocks are higher now than they have been in years. Fish stocks are often reported (by anglers) as being in decline, but when there is an EA fish survey they find loads. There are exceptions of course. Many rivers ahve suffered pollution and over abstraction, and canalisation. This will ahev finsihed off far mroe rivers than any otter 'problem'. agreed, many other factors contributing to poor recruitment and stocks.. look how we got rolled over regarding cormorants, water companies not having to register releases of sewage etc... we, as anglers are constantly affected and required to roll over?

 

My local River Kennet has no otters. Oh yes it does! contact the Berks BAP and do some research before stating things like that Yet everyone is still ranting about the barbel stocks 'not being as they were'. However, Reading and District Angling Club forum identifies a comment by a member that he was fishing and the EA came along electrofishing. Whislt he was slightly narked, he was interested to note that three double figure barbel popped up from his swim. He had no idea that they were there - he'd had no bites.

 

Just because we are not catching them it does not mean they are not therea bit like the otter surveys then?. Also, just because a barbel has been found (why is it always barbel or carp?) partly devoured by an otter they are easier to catch than small fish, they will deliver a higher requirement of nutrition from the stomach and organs than chasing and eating lots of small fish, we have no idea whether it was dead or dying beforehand. It's actually highly likely. I can't recall the number of times I've seen a barbel gasping in the river, but it's a considerable number.that must be due to the water in question..In 35 years of fishing the Ouse I've never seen a gasping barbel

 

June 17th last year a 6lb barbel came tumbling down from upstream. I tried to catch it in my net to revive it but it was gone. I went upstream later and spoke to an angler - 'oh just the one, about 6lb' he said. Now it's highly likely that that barbel did not survive, and I would say that this happens much more often than we think, or admit to.

 

What I'm saying is that I think we should provide hard scientific evidence to back up our claims. Barking about big barbel, or big carp with a name does not support an argumentbig, small, named or not... it does not matter - it just identifies how passionate we are about our sport. We need to be able to say that the fishery and river or lake habitat is being harmed. You do not measure the health of a fishery by the number and size of fish one can catch.

 

I reinforce my previous comments - 12, 900 otters is not a sutainable number. This is 2004 figures, but assuming that they have increased by 20% (unlikely) there would be 15, 400.Great Britain is 228919 KM Sq... divide that by 50 and that gives you 4578 50km sq blocks and a male Otter uses 35KmSq as territory...so, yes, even if it was just 12,900 animals then that is quite close to carrying capacity.... then take those numbers and refine them down to actual area that is habitable to the Otter and you'll see that you end up with over population to the carrying capacity Hardly overrun by them are we?getting there and in my local area as I already posted, the BAP consider that too be the case too... but your areas OK so my comments invalid

 

Who has seen one?I have, on a number of occassions... but considering the very nature of the animal in question I'm sure the respondees will be very small in number... NOT due to the lack of Otters, but due to the Otter itself

[Anderoo]

Who has seen one?

 

I'm not getting into all this again, but I will answer this - yes, I have seen two in the last four years, both in the Windrush.

[Guest Culshan]

Sometimes, they need to co-operate a little more with those who might just know more than them? Who would that be? Anglers are passionate, but they are not fishery scientists. I give you a quote from Dr Bruno Broughton, independent fisheries consultant.

 

This process has got to lead somewhere and have a practical outcome. Anglers need to help collect hard evidence of specific problems affecting fish stocks. That evidence then needs to be investigated seriously and unbiasedly.

 

Referring to your evidence - it's highly unlikely that otter populations present in the 80's will still be around in 2000 if there is - as you said - insufficient food resource, road kill, indirect poisoning with heavy metals etc. Also why would they lie about numbers? The more they have the better they can demonstrate their success. Also, who is breeding all these otters?

 

The thing is, anglers are barking on about this, but I don't think there is any evidence to say that otters are harming fish stocks. We bark when it is big fish, but in terms of a healthy fishery, loads of big fish does not indicate a healthy fishery. What we are barking about is that we don'ty get the opportunity to catch big fish. That's not really a good reason environmentally speaking.

 

Generally, I would say that fish stocks are higher now than they have been in years. Fish stocks are often reported (by anglers) as being in decline, but when there is an EA fish survey they find loads. There are exceptions of course. Many rivers ahve suffered pollution and over abstraction, and canalisation. This will ahev finsihed off far mroe rivers than any otter 'problem'.

 

My local River Kennet has no otters. Yet everyone is still ranting about the barbel stocks 'not being as they were'. However, Reading and District Angling Club forum identifies a comment by a member that he was fishing and the EA came along electrofishing. Whislt he was slightly narked, he was interested to note that three double figure barbel popped up from his swim. He had no idea that they were there - he'd had no bites.

 

Just because we are not catching them it does not mean they are not there. Also, just because a barbel has been found (why is it always barbel or carp?) partly devoured by an otter, we have no idea whether it was dead or dying beforehand. It's actually highly likely. I can't recall the number of times I've seen a barbel gasping in the river, but it's a considerable number.

 

June 17th last year a 6lb barbel came tumbling down from upstream. I tried to catch it in my net to revive it but it was gone. I went upstream later and spoke to an angler - 'oh just the one, about 6lb' he said. Now it's highly likely that that barbel did not survive, and I would say that this happens much more often than we think, or admit to.

 

What I'm saying is that I think we should provide hard scientific evidence to back up our claims. Barking about big barbel, or big carp with a name does not support an argument - it just identifies how passionate we are about our sport. We need to be able to say that the fishery and river or lake habitat is being harmed. You do not measure the health of a fishery by the number and size of fish one can catch.

 

I reinforce my previous comments - 12, 900 otters is not a sutainable number. This is 2004 figures, but assuming that they have increased by 20% (unlikely) there would be 15, 400. Hardly overrun by them are we?

 

Who has seen one?

 

I can't believe that you are advocating providing 'hard scientific evidence' and then produce such a subjective and speculative post. The Otters that were around in the 80's probably are not around now, but that doesn't mean that there are less Otters now. To say 'I don't think there is any evidence to say that otters are harming fish stocks' is worse than misleading. There are numerous reports of Otters causing problems, some of which have been posted on Anglers Net. My own fishery has in the recent past suffered serious fish kills. I have now not only erected an Otter proof fence but also an electric fence. It is interesting to note that these animals will eventually learn to climb even a substantial 'Otter proof' fence. I would be interested to know how you are sure that the River Kennet has no Otters. If this is the case I would be very surprised.

[arbocop]

I'm not getting into all this again.

 

 

Neither am I! However, are there any vacancies for your Windrush stretch? I want to see one too!