Coarse Angling Today - Let eels become extinct

[Mark7]

In the January edition of Coarse Angling Today, Dan Williams, Assistant Editor of Pike and Predator Magazine, writes a guest editorial about the decline of the eel, and how a foreign parasite has damaged eel stocks. He then writes : “Some things evolve and some things become extinct, that's just a fact of life. We can possibly help to improve future eel stocks, but do we need to ? Why not let nature take its course, which may see that parasite evolve and the eel become extinct ? Why spend money in this day and age on something that may only help a few anglers ? Future generations just may not have the eel to catch so they will have to focus on another species. Just like we watch meerkats at the zoo instead of panda's......” This is an irresponsible and very limited comment, ignoring the importance of the eel in our waters. He has completely overlooked the importance of the species to our fisheries in a wider context.

 

On behalf of the National Anguilla Club, I will be contacting the magazine and the journalist involved, and ask for a retraction in the next issue, and an attempt at an intelligent analysis of the eel’s situation. The eel is a "Keystone" species, which means that: "it has a disproportionately large effect on its environment relative to its abundance. Such species play a critical role in maintaining the structure of an ecology, affecting many other organisams in an ecosystem and helping to determine the types and numbers of various other species in the community". Consequently, apart from the fact that some of us like to fish for them, eels are critical to the health of our waters and fish stocks. An example of this is the theory that otters are turning to alternative food sources in areas where eels are no longer plentiful. As for some waters having good stocks of mature eel, then that is most certainly true, Equally, however, there are many waters where eels were once commonplace that are now sparsely stocked. The complicated and extended lifecycle of the eel and the threats facing it mean that we will not see a real decline in mature eel numbers in some areas for a few years yet. The Anguillicola crassus parasite is only one of many factors affecting eels stocks: commercial fishing, barriers in rivers, predation, pollution and loss of wetlans being but a few. The EA and conservation organisations are making inroads into the barriers and obstruction issues facing both migrating eels and returning elvers, and that will have an impact. Sadly, all attempts at limiting eel exploitation have had little effect. What we would like to see, however,is the angling publications supporting the effort to conserve the eel, and not encouraging a "let them go extinct" attitude. Angling Times and Anglers Mail have both adopted a very supportive role in the past, and it is unfortunate that a publication such as Coarse Angling Today cannot take a more responsible conservational stance.

__________________

Mark Salt

[Dales]

Plus not forgeting that they make great bait.

[Steve Walker]

That seems a remarkably self-centred idea of the conservation of biodiversity.

[Anderoo]

Thick anglers are not uncommon, they just become problems when they learn rudimentary writing skills.

[Kappa]

In the January edition of Coarse Angling Today, Dan Williams, Assistant Editor of Pike and Predator Magazine, writes a guest editorial about the decline of the eel, and how a foreign parasite has damaged eel stocks. He then writes : “Some things evolve and some things become extinct, that's just a fact of life. We can possibly help to improve future eel stocks, but do we need to ? Why not let nature take its course, which may see that parasite evolve and the eel become extinct ? Why spend money in this day and age on something that may only help a few anglers ? Future generations just may not have the eel to catch so they will have to focus on another species. Just like we watch meerkats at the zoo instead of panda's......” This is an irresponsible and very limited comment, ignoring the importance of the eel in our waters. He has completely overlooked the importance of the species to our fisheries in a wider context.

 

I kind of see what he is saying (in a pretty clumsy way), I always find strange that so much conservation efforts are focused on the more cuddly creatures e.g. tigers and pandas. Also I do kinda agree if an animal is going extinct (for a good natural reason) is it really worth trying to save it? However, if man or mans activities have lead to a decline or near extinction then I think it is our 'duty' to remedy the situation to improve matters.

 

I'm sure he would not be saying the same if it were pike. It is just a short step away from cull everything that isn't carp / pike / my favourite species **** everyone else attitude. I'm just as bad tho, I don't care about tigers or pandas, I'd much prefer more focus on local conservation projects.

 

Rich

[Dales]

I find fishing for and conservation of eels very hard to tie up. One seems to contradict the other, you may not like Dan Williams piece but he is not doing anything to speed up there extinction. But are anglers who target them likely to effect there numbers?

 

Rather then ask for a retraction, would it not be better to encourage NAC members to give up fishing for eels? I have a strange sense of Dega Vu about this, NAC members telling others what they should do or think while still fishing for the species they are interested in.

 

EDIT: We only seem to see NAC members posting when they are either having a pop at other anglers or telling other anglers what they should be doing. Is this because they make very little progress in area's that really matter?

 

Sadly, all attempts at limiting eel exploitation have had little effect.

Edited January 5, 2012 by Dales

[Emma two]

I find fishing for and conservation of eels very hard to tie up. One seems to contradict the other, you may not like Dan Williams piece but he is not doing anything to speed up there extinction. But are anglers who target them likely to effect there numbers?

 

 

I tend to agree with that. I stopped fishing for eels when their decline became apparent. Catch and release is good in principle, but the very nature of this species makes it difficult to ensure clean enough hooking to do that, especially in these days when it is fashionable for anglers to take a tent and a bed fishing and literally sleep on the job. The eel may be passing into history, I don't fully understand the reasons, but we encounter less of them, so my inner voice tells me to leave 'em alone.

 

The fellows written statements are difficult to argue against,

“Some things evolve and some things become extinct, that's just a fact of life. We can possibly help to improve future eel stocks, but do we need to ? ,

some species do become extinct and that is a fact, some species evolved and then became extinct before humans evolved to cause that extinction, our contemporary science and resources let us know lots of things that we worry ourselves about and significantly blame ourselves for. The response from the NAC includes speculation over a range of human activities as being to blame, yet fails to contribute any evidence to support their case. Are we destined to blame ourselves for every species extinction?

 

Writing to demand retractions of essential truths combined with a personal comment 'some species have had their time', is a bit petty, within angling there seems to be a reflection of contemporary society's enthusiasm for crying for bans for thr things they don't understand or are at odds with comfortable understanding and now it seems that free speech is under scrutiny too.

Edited January 5, 2012 by Emma two

[Mark7]

I find fishing for and conservation of eels very hard to tie up. One seems to contradict the other, you may not like Dan Williams piece but he is not doing anything to speed up there extinction. But are anglers who target them likely to effect there numbers?

 

Rather then ask for a retraction, would it not be better to encourage NAC members to give up fishing for eels? I have a strange sense of Dega Vu about this, NAC members telling others what they should do or think while still fishing for the species they are interested in.

 

An interesting response, and one that has been debated on here before. As an organisation, we are confident that very few eels die as a result of capture, and our activities have little, if any, impact on the species. In any event, NAC members giving up eel fishing would result in no NAC, and consequently no one to fight the eels' corner, unless, of course, you plan to take up the cause?

As for Dan's comments "not doing anything to speed up their extinction": any unenlightened angler reading his editorial might be inclined to agree, and thus not support eel conservation. His ill judged remarks certainly don't help! Finally. we are not telling anyone what to do or think, merely making our views known, as you have.

[Emma two]

any unenlightened angler reading his editorial might be inclined to agree,

 

 

By that do you mean, 'anyone (angler) who doesn't see things your way?

[Emma two]

[,

Edited January 5, 2012 by Emma two