Survey: impacts of cormorants at inland sites in the UK

[Beccy]

Hi

 

I'm a biology student at Nottingham Uni, I am doing my final year project about recent changes in the UK cormorant population and the impacts of comorants on fish populations at inland sites.

 

Please fill in my questionnaire, it'll only take a few minutes, it can be found at:

http://www.my3q.com/home/uk_cormorants/6334.phtml

 

I am am also interested in hearing your experiences and views on the subject.

 

Thanks

[Vagabond]

If you get hold of a copy of "Birds of the Western Palearctic" and turn to "Cormorant - Food" Pages 203/4 of Volume 1, there is a long list of papers showing:-

 

1/ Cormorants eat a hell of a lot of fish

 

2/ They go for the easiest and most abundant prey fish available - ie flatfish in estuaries, salmonids in Scottish lochs, perch in Windermere, cyprinids in lowland waters etc etc.

 

I don't know how many such studies are necessary to convince the Government that action to control cormorants is needed (I suspect they require an infinite number, but thats just me being cynical - or is it?)

 

Most of these papers date from the 40s, 50s and 60s. Neither the habits of cormorants, nor those of politicians, has changed since then.

[Beccy]

There's actually been quite a lot of research done since then, including a report by DEFRA called the Population, Distribution, Movements and Survival of Fish-eating Birds of Great Britain in 1999. There's also been research into the cormorants's diets using carbon dating etc..

 

However, you're right that there has not been much done about the problem. Cormorants are protected by European Legislation- they can't be culled unless it has been proved that they are causing damage at fisheries. There seems to be little data showing the amount of fish cormorants take from fish populations, making it difficult to prove that the problem exists.

 

It's not clear whether even culling would be effective, since birds will move from site to site and will always return to the best fishing spots.

[Vagabond]

Beccy:

There's actually been quite a lot of research done since then.

Yes Beccy, we know - that's the point that (rather sarcastically) I was making. Unfortunately this more recent research has apparently not helped the anglers' case very much. Rather, it has confirmed what we already knew, but we are told that "further research is needed" - the standard politicians' excuse for avoiding the issue.

 

The DEFRA report is a very sore point in fishing circles - some anglers are near-apoplectic over it.

 

It might be worth your while to do a search on this forum under "cormorants" - plenty of background information should be there.

 

I hope you can turn up some realistic figures on fish consumption and would be very interested in a synopsis of your project when it is complete.

 

As a starting point, my own calculation assumes cormorants eat around 16% of their own body weight in fish per day (various papers agree with this sort of figure), which means about 500 to 700 grams of fish are eaten daily - for a year that translates into 180 to 255 kg so lets call it roughly 200 kg per year. So every five cormorants on a fishery eat ONE METRIC TONNE of fish per year!

 

Thats a lot of fish - and if you ask Dr Bruno Broughton nicely, he will doubtless tell you what annual productivities and standing stocks (of fish) might be expected in various types of fishery - I haven't got those figures at my finger tips, but he has. However, I doubt if many fisheries could stand a yearly loss of around five metric tonnes of fish to feed a couple of dozen cormorants

 

Good luck with your project.

[chesters1]

i shouldnt bother with this post ,all work done at university ultimatly belongs to the university ,as universities are government funded (to an extent)any thing found in research that will cost the gov money will undouptably be "lost".on the other hand anything that will make the university money that the students through their research find (i.e electricity from earwax or whatever)will be swiftly copywrited by the uni ,the student gets nothing but a mention (if their lucky) on a paper written by a proffessor using the students work.

[Vagabond]

Have now completed your questionnaire - out of all the different waters I fish, I have elected to answer on behalf of the smaller streams, as these suffer most from cormorants.

 

Commercial fishery owners can to some extent protect their fish stocks - they are on the spot most of the daylight hours. Small streams are usually leased by small clubs, and fished by few anglers. Many days see no anglers there at all, so cormorants can wreak havoc on such easily caught fish as roach and dace. There has been a serious decline in dace numbers on many small streams.

 

PS Can't agree with Chesters here - if this project convinces just one biologist that cormorants are a serious threat to our fisheries, it will have been worthwhile.

 

[ 13 April 2002, 09:32 PM: Message edited by: Vagabond ]

[OP-JB]

Yes Minister,

We were all told that Maff were doing research into the impact of the inland cormorants and when the study, costing millions, was finished it would prove what anglers already knew.

Everyone just sat tight expecting the truth to come out.

I am still furious and totally disenchanted with any bureaucratic involvement into fisheries.

The R.S.P.B. had more influence over the cormorant issue than the anglers and owners so they remain protected.

You can get "permission" to cull 10% of your resident flock if you can prove they are damaging your livelyhood and you have tried every non-lethal method of protection known to man.

I can assure you, brothers and sisters of the angle, there is nothing quite like shooting them!

(I dont shoot them without permission because I would stand alone and yet I would be acting for other peoples interest).

10% is the best we can hope for because that is the middle ground and to step either side of that line requires courage.

Anglers are apoplectic because they know the truth about cormorant impact but the powers that be do not care about the truth, they will try to please the group with the loudest voice.

Remember the advert with the ants who all join together to shift a rhino or elephant from the track (sorry U.S.A), thats the R.S.P.B. Anglers are almost by definition, solitary and so cant be heard.

 

Op -JB

[Beccy]

In reply to Chesters, I'm going to try to produce a website, based on my project so the information will available to any to view who's interested.

[chesters1]

if your using university resources for your research ,then you will have to consult the uni ,remember they own you.

[chesters1]

sorry beccy i`m not having a go at you

the image is of a folding satellite capable mobile phone antenae ,it was designed over 3years by a chap called steve leach and made by myself (took all that time to produce a decent board ) after he used it to graduate it was legaly "taken "from him ,now the uni gets the credit and nokia the aerial ,if he had designed and manufactured it "outside" we would have been set up for life ,there is no mention of our hard work anywhere.

so anybody at uni be warned.