For the introduction of non-lethal means of control of the Otter

[lutra]

How did angling ever move on from the dark days of wanting to kill every pike that swims? They must kill way more fish and little baby ducklings every year than otters do.

If otters were fish and we could fish for them, would there be an otter angling society? Would this thread even exist? I think not.

 

[mikench]

Most birds, including gulls, are protected species!

 

[no-one in particular]

Can you believe the government issue licences to kill bull finches ?....beyond belief imo.

I don't know about licensing laws but Bullfinches eat the buds of fruit trees and can do a lot of damage so an orchard owner would not want them around. The law was probably passed when they were common but they are in serious decline now
When it comes to protecting crops and the creature is common, it would be seen to be OK.
That's the problem with otters, coarse fish are not crops and the only people complaining about them are anglers who's only interest is in catching them which is not going to get much sympathy in Gov or elsewhere. If they were an important food source, would be a different story.
I don't know of any instances of otters getting into fish farms, salmon or carp and eating the "crop" but that might perk up a bit of interest from Government but coarse fish just used for angling pleasure, not much chance it would seem. I imagine most people are quite happy for them to feed the otters. However, I think the Government could show a bit more sympathy to angling as a trade and business generating jobs and the recreation of a sizable part of the population. With otters in serious up-cline some sort of balancing act could be considered.

 

[nottskev]

Can you believe the government issue licences to kill bull finches ?....beyond belief imo.

I didn't know that. Very surprising. I've just read the post about fruit tree damage too. Round here, in and out of town, finches are nothing like as common as they once were. Greenfinches and chaffinches are occasionally seen, goldfinches rarely and bullfinches almost never. I used to see winter flocks, but I can't remember the last time I did. I like to see them - like most birds, it lifts your spirits to bump into them.

 

[nottskev]

It's often stated that anglers, whatever the merits of their argument, dare not assert themselves as loudly as many comparatively small interest groups do, because we would attract unfavourable attention to angling and we'd inevitably lose in "the court of public opinion". What is this view based on? That's a genuine question, by the way, not a "What are you on about?" question.

In nearly 50 years of fishing, where everyone I know knows I do it, and a lot of of it carried out in urban and suburban areas, with plenty of footfall on the banks, where I've been carrying gear or sitting in public view, my experience doesn't lead me to believe there is enormous latent hostility to angling.

Most seem to accept what I'm doing with indifference. Some take a bit of interest, and ask what fish if any are in the water, and whether I've caught any. The news that I put them all back is usually received with equanimity, implying they wouldn't be that bothered if I didn't, but think it mildly odd that I do. Anyone raising an eyebrow with an ethical question implied has tended to look satisfied with my usual defence that anglers like me try not to hurt the fish and angling organisations are about the only people who care if the waters are healthy and the only ones likely to monitor this and try to hold eg polluters to account.

Once in all that time, I got a bit of anti-angling stick, and it was more Monty Python than ALF. Fishing steak and mince for chub on the Trent embankment, a young woman who had been 30m away and 5m behind when I cast in a feeder, shouted that I'd nearly killed her with that "thing". She then pointed to the swan at my feet and shouted "You be careful with that line. Line kills swans!". I pointed out that it was sitting there because I'd been feeding it all morning. Her boyfriend muttered "come on" on pulled her away.

I'm aware that in western societies more broadly, there is a gradual shift in the direction of extending rights to creatures in the ethical field, and in the scientific one, extending our understanding of which creatures are sentient and can experience pain and suffering. But our society is also one that is happy to risk ruining it's environment, whilst promoting a sentimental Disney view of its wildlife, so owning up to stressing out a few fish in pursuit of our enjoyment may well be the lesser of these evils when put in a proper perspective. We need to have our act together in arguing that fishing, sensibly regulated and done "properly" is not a gratuitous cruelty and has positive benefits and a role in respecting and maintaining the environment. That might mean, for some, that anglers must never breathe a word against otters or other predators, but I'm not sure anglers should suffer in silence if there are reasons to argue the status quo is not working and open to challenge. There's a good case for angling, and for some protections for fish.

 

[lutra]

It's often stated that anglers, whatever the merits of their argument, dare not assert themselves as loudly as many comparatively small interest groups do, because we would attract unfavourable attention to angling and we'd inevitably lose in "the court of public opinion". What is this view based on? That's a genuine question, by the way, not a "What are you on about?" question.

In nearly 50 years of fishing, where everyone I know knows I do it, and a lot of of it carried out in urban and suburban areas, with plenty of footfall on the banks, where I've been carrying gear or sitting in public view, my experience doesn't lead me to believe there is enormous latent hostility to angling.

Most seem to accept what I'm doing with indifference. Some take a bit of interest, and ask what fish if any are in the water, and whether I've caught any. The news that I put them all back is usually received with equanimity, implying they wouldn't be that bothered if I didn't, but think it mildly odd that I do. Anyone raising an eyebrow with an ethical question implied has tended to look satisfied with my usual defence that anglers like me try not to hurt the fish and angling organisations are about the only people who care if the waters are healthy and the only ones likely to monitor this and try to hold eg polluters to account.

Once in all that time, I got a bit of anti-angling stick, and it was more Monty Python than ALF. Fishing steak and mince for chub on the Trent embankment, a young woman who had been 30m away and 5m behind when I cast in a feeder, shouted that I'd nearly killed her with that "thing". She then pointed to the swan at my feet and shouted "You be careful with that line. Line kills swans!". I pointed out that it was sitting there because I'd been feeding it all morning. Her boyfriend muttered "come on" on pulled her away.

I'm aware that in western societies more broadly, there is a gradual shift in the direction of extending rights to creatures in the ethical field, and in the scientific one, extending our understanding of which creatures are sentient and can experience pain and suffering. But our society is also one that is happy to risk ruining it's environment, whilst promoting a sentimental Disney view of its wildlife, so owning up to stressing out a few fish in pursuit of our enjoyment may well be the lesser of these evils when put in a proper perspective. We need to have our act together in arguing that fishing, sensibly regulated and done "properly" is not a gratuitous cruelty and has positive benefits and a role in respecting and maintaining the environment. That might mean, for some, that anglers must never breathe a word against otters or other predators, but I'm not sure anglers should suffer in silence if there are reasons to argue the status quo is not working and open to challenge. There's a good case for angling, and for some protections for fish.

Personally I believe there is a very good case that angling hasn't respected or maintained the environment, but vastly altered it in recent years and most of the otter problems are because of this.

As someone who on top of fishing spends a lot of his spare time hunting and shooting, I can tell you shooting a few otters will make absolutely on difference. While we have open over stocked stillwaters (mainly carp) and rivers with **** poor recruitment and just mainly big fish, the problem will not go away. You kill one otter another one will take its places and it will never stop.

IMO the only way this problem will go away is to put fences around your over stocked stillwaters and sort out recruitment on rivers. End of.

 

[sam vimes]

Not for one moment would I suggest that there's a significant anti-angling sentiment amongst the general public. Many just think anglers are mildly eccentric, but most are fairly indifferent. However, when it comes to otters, public opinion has them down as cute, wonderfully beneficial and the poster boy for how green and environmentally responsible we all are. The fact that it's all a big PR myth is largely irrelevant. The fact that otters might eat a shed load of fish doesn't bother the general public one iota. There's no greater purpose for a freshwater fish than to feed an otter as far as the majority of the public is concerned. There is also the perception that otters are still as rare as rocking horse poop.* The fact that the majority rarely leave the metropolitan areas, let alone sit quietly by a river for hours on end, is a huge factor. This is why any anti-otter campaign by anglers has the potential to turn a largely indifferent public against angling.



*I'm not convinced that otter numbers are as high as some anglers believe. The number of times I've been aware of mink working a stretch, only to have a fellow angler rave on about the otter "just over there, look!" is just too numerous. From anglers comments I see on forums and hear on the banks, I think there are a few too many anglers that don't appreciate just how big an otter is. That rather suggests that their "otter" sightings may not be particularly reliable. I believe that, as a group, anglers often have an inflated idea of how prevalent otters are. Conversely, many of the wildlife organisations and the media seem to be playing numbers down.

 

[nottskev]

Personally I believe there is a very good case that angling hasn't respected or maintained the environment, but vastly altered it in recent years and most of the otter problems are because of this.

As someone who on top of fishing spends a lot of his spare time hunting and shooting, I can tell you shooting a few otters will make absolutely on difference. While we have open over stocked stillwaters (mainly carp) and rivers with **** poor recruitment and just mainly big fish, the problem will not go away. You kill one otter another one will take its places and it will never stop.

IMO the only way this problem will go away is to put fences around your over stocked stillwaters and sort out recruitment on rivers. End of.

MY overstocked stillwaters? Not sure what you mean. I don't fish them , nor do my comments revolve around them. Funnily enough, what prompted me to post was finding out yesterday that a local club water had been having, for the first time, otter attacks on it's stocks. The water is some distance from the nearest river, which is, in this case, in quite a good state with fish of a variety of species and sizes. The club in question is rightly famous for the work it does, alongside working to promote balanced stocks on its river fishery, in restoring and revitalising a series of local park lakes that had fallen into a poor state; work that involves well-informed fishery management, de-silting, reversal of bankside foliage growth into margins etc etc. And the water where fish are being lost was one where already healthy stocks were being thinned out by transfer to other waters in order to promote good long term growth. The club have indeed "vastly altered" the local angling landscape - for the better.

I see what you are getting at, but implying that otter problems are what you get as a result of short-sighted fishery management is imo too big a generalisation.

There's more to this than a strategically misjudged petition, as the AT Chief Executive MarK Lloyd's response to its rejection notes:

“However, despite this obvious setback we will do our best to convince decision makers that the return of otters in such large numbers is having a detrimental impact on a number of rivers and stillwaters and we will continue to work with others to try to limit any damage through sensible and practical measures which will not damage the reputation of angling in the public eye.”

 

[lutra]

MY overstocked stillwaters? Not sure what you mean. I don't fish them , nor do my comments revolve around them. Funnily enough, what prompted me to post was finding out yesterday that a local club water had been having, for the first time, otter attacks on it's stocks. The water is some distance from the nearest river, which is, in this case, in quite a good state with fish of a variety of species and sizes. The club in question is rightly famous for the work it does, alongside working to promote balanced stocks on its river fishery, in restoring and revitalising a series of local park lakes that had fallen into a poor state; work that involves well-informed fishery management, de-silting, reversal of bankside foliage growth into margins etc etc. And the water where fish are being lost was one where already healthy stocks were being thinned out by transfer to other waters in order to promote good long term growth. The club have indeed "vastly altered" the local angling landscape - for the better.

I see what you are getting at, but implying that otter problems are what you get as a result of short-sighted fishery management is imo too big a generalisation.

There's more to this than a strategically misjudged petition, as the AT Chief Executive MarK Lloyd's response to its rejection notes:

“However, despite this obvious setback we will do our best to convince decision makers that the return of otters in such large numbers is having a detrimental impact on a number of rivers and stillwaters and we will continue to work with others to try to limit any damage through sensible and practical measures which will not damage the reputation of angling in the public eye.”

Finding ottered fish on the banks of healthy waters does not mean you have some major problem or even any kind of a problem. It just means the water has fish in it and otters eat fish.

Even on some of the smaller stillwaters around here I've been finding ottered fish for the last twenty odd years (seems to happen more in winter) and they are still full of fish.

 

[nottskev]

Finding ottered fish on the banks of healthy waters does not mean you have some major problem or even any kind of a problem. It just means the water has fish in it and otters eat fish.

Even on some of the smaller stillwaters around here I've been finding ottered fish for the last twenty odd years (seems to happen more in winter) and they are still full of fish.

Well, that may be right, and it would be good if things always turn out like that - but who knows what it means for the particular water concerned, and how things will pan out? I wouldn't contradict your claim that that some of your local waters have proved resilient and accommodate otters - how could I? But if things always resolved so satisfactorily, why, leaving aside the anecdotal evidence from anglers "against" otters, the recognition by many, including the pretty moderate AT, that otters will indeed cause problems on some rivers and stillwaters, the need to fence waters, the grant aid from EA for doing that, and so on?
The water I referred to is run by a pretty savvy bunch with a lot of fishery management experience, and they are a lot less relaxed than you about finding the ottered fish on the banks, the motion video of otters and the tracks in the access brook. On a water that has been carefully nurtured via thousands of volunteer hours, they're dismayed to have lost, as best they can tell, half a dozen fish in the 8-14lb range and 3 adult waterfowl inside a week. There is no guarantee that they will have permission to put up fences.

 

[thecrow]

As with most things in life opinions will be formed from experiences angling is no different in that respect, some will know of waters where otters and fish coexist and have done for a long time others will know of waters where the arrival of otters has seen a dramatic downturn in fish stocks, there is no doubt that otters can have a detrimental effect on some waters to the extent that the otter has to look elsewhere for its food.

I have read that otters have large territories and will fight to keep them but if otter numbers have grown beyond what it is thought they are at (when was the last study done and how accurate was it?) is it possible that the territories of otters have shrunk to accommodate an increase in population beyond that which is known? resulting in more otters putting pressure on smaller areas when it comes to food.

if this is not the case and otter numbers haven't grown beyond what was known at the time of the last study and accepting that otters do fight to maintain territories and breeding rights where are all the carcasses from these fights? I see pictures of fish killed by otters regularly but have yet to see one of an otter killed or injured during fighting although I have seen ones of them killed on roads. Are any dead ones found before being eaten by another predator or during the summer become fly blown and only bones are left?

I am aware that some otters that have been injured during fights will be found and nursed back to health by people that think that they are doing the otter a good turn eventually releasing it in a totally unregulated manner which in turn could lead to it being injured again or taking up residence on a fishery previously unaffected by otters they do neither any favours, the people that nurse these animals back to health do so imo for the feel good factor they get from doing it, they have little understanding of nature where without interference these animals would die, it is if you like natures way of controlling numbers of any animal.

 

[lutra]

Well, that may be right, and it would be good if things always turn out like that - but who knows what it means for the particular water concerned, and how things will pan out? I wouldn't contradict your claim that that some of your local waters have proved resilient and accommodate otters - how could I? But if things always resolved so satisfactorily, why, leaving aside the anecdotal evidence from anglers "against" otters, the recognition by many, including the pretty moderate AT, that otters will indeed cause problems on some rivers and stillwaters, the need to fence waters, the grant aid from EA for doing that, and so on?
The water I referred to is run by a pretty savvy bunch with a lot of fishery management experience, and they are a lot less relaxed than you about finding the ottered fish on the banks, the motion video of otters and the tracks in the access brook. On a water that has been carefully nurtured via thousands of volunteer hours, they're dismayed to have lost, as best they can tell, half a dozen fish in the 8-14lb range and 3 adult waterfowl inside a week. There is no guarantee that they will have permission to put up fences.

One of my local clubs took on a smallish (2 acres, a mile or 2 up a very small stream from the river) stillwater twenty odd years ago, but it only had roach, perch and a few jacks in it. Soon after they lost another water to developers, so they move 30 carp and some bream from it and put them in the new water. All went well and time ticked on a few years and the bream spawned putting a good number of skimmers in the water. Maybe not great for the carp heads, but all was healthy and doing well and you could even catch a carp or two (7-20lb) on top of nice bags of silvers.

About 12 years ago now, I started finding ottered skimmers, never a carp. Word soon went around that the carp were doomed. I didn't fish it a lot (not many did). but when I did in winter and spring mainly (still finding half eaten skimmers on the bank) I did well with the silvers and still got a bonuce carp or two from time to time.

A couple of years ago they lost the water to a carp syndicate who netted the place to make way for the new stock and get rid of the skimmers. To the surprise of many it still had most (26) of the carp still in it. Not a bad loss for carp that have been transferred to and lived twenty years in a new water with at least 10 years of them putting up with otters, that I know of.

Why do you think I can tell a true story like that, yet your story starts with "half a dozen fish in the 8-14lb range and 3 adult waterfowl inside a week" being lost to otters?

Could it be because "And the water where fish are being lost was one where already healthy stocks were being thinned out by transfer to other waters in order to promote good long term growth" and that left the otters sod all else to eat other than that?

 

[nottskev]

One of my local clubs took on a smallish (2 acres, a mile or 2 up a very small stream from the river) stillwater twenty odd years ago, but it only had roach, perch and a few jacks in it. Soon after they lost another water to developers, so they move 30 carp and some bream from it and put them in the new water. All went well and time ticked on a few years and the bream spawned putting a good number of skimmers in the water. Maybe not great for the carp heads, but all was healthy and doing well and you could even catch a carp or two (7-20lb) on top of nice bags of silvers.

About 12 years ago now, I started finding ottered skimmers, never a carp. Word soon went around that the carp were doomed. I didn't fish it a lot (not many did). but when I did in winter and spring mainly (still finding half eaten skimmers on the bank) I did well with the silvers and still got a bonuce carp or two from time to time.

A couple of years ago they lost the water to a carp syndicate who netted the place to make way for the new stock and get rid of the skimmers. To the surprise of many it still had most (26) of the carp still in it. Not a bad loss for carp that have been transferred to and lived twenty years in a new water with at least 10 years of them putting up with otters, that I know of.

Why do you think I can tell a true story like that, yet your story starts with "half a dozen fish in the 8-14lb range and 3 adult waterfowl inside a week" being lost to otters?

Could it be because "And the water where fish are being lost was one where already healthy stocks were being thinned out by transfer to other waters in order to promote good long term growth" and that left the otters sod all else to eat other than that?

Not entirely sure why, but I think the point is that in a water with a variety of species and sizes, otters, in your case, seemed to mainly take smaller fish like skimmers?

The water I've been referring to here is, alone amongst the club's mixed stillwaters, cultivated, and has been for years, as a carp water. It's not an easy, massively stocked commercial type water, but demands a patient and thoughtful approach. Most of the carp are, I'm told, in double figures, some 20's. I'm not a carp angler, but it's clearly their pride and joy.

The loss of several good-sized fish, in short order, has caused a good deal of concern. Photo's of the carcasses, mostly intact, are online, as are photos of the dead waterfowl found at the same time, and video of the otters, so there's no question of rumour or exaggeration, as some posters claim - not that you have - whenever otter damage is mentioned. The water has been under careful management via advice from consultants etc for a long time, and it would be perverse to argue that, in a water that had never seen an otter until this event, the club ought to have been working towards a more varied menu just in case otters decided to show up.

There is, of course, the pro-fox argument: if you gather some chickens together, it's your fault, not the fox's, if you attract predation. But the spread of otters is presenting us with new situations and fresh surprises. And how far can the chicken/fox argument be pushed? If badgers and moles dig my lawn up, is it my fault for making one? (Actually, they do, and I don't personally mind, but that's another question. Not everyone is obliged to be so tolerant) If I| get mugged is it my fault for walking round with money in my pocket? I understand the arguments for protecting a species; but I can also see that a protected species can become a nuisance in some contexts, and a threat to waters that aren't overstocked commercials or moribund rivers.

 

[bennygesserit]

the real reason otters are predating other fish is because the eels have disappeared

 

[lutra]

the real reason otters are predating other fish is because the eels have disappeared

I sure it will play a part, but the problems for eels are not just in England. The big problems with otters seems to be.

 

[lutra]

Not entirely sure why, but I think the point is that in a water with a variety of species and sizes, otters, in your case, seemed to mainly take smaller fish like skimmers?

The water I've been referring to here is, alone amongst the club's mixed stillwaters, cultivated, and has been for years, as a carp water. It's not an easy, massively stocked commercial type water, but demands a patient and thoughtful approach. Most of the carp are, I'm told, in double figures, some 20's. I'm not a carp angler, but it's clearly their pride and joy.

The loss of several good-sized fish, in short order, has caused a good deal of concern. Photo's of the carcasses, mostly intact, are online, as are photos of the dead waterfowl found at the same time, and video of the otters, so there's no question of rumour or exaggeration, as some posters claim - not that you have - whenever otter damage is mentioned. The water has been under careful management via advice from consultants etc for a long time, and it would be perverse to argue that, in a water that had never seen an otter until this event, the club ought to have been working towards a more varied menu just in case otters decided to show up.

There is, of course, the pro-fox argument: if you gather some chickens together, it's your fault, not the fox's, if you attract predation. But the spread of otters is presenting us with new situations and fresh surprises. And how far can the chicken/fox argument be pushed? If badgers and moles dig my lawn up, is it my fault for making one? (Actually, they do, and I don't personally mind, but that's another question. Not everyone is obliged to be so tolerant) If I| get mugged is it my fault for walking round with money in my pocket? I understand the arguments for protecting a species; but I can also see that a protected species can become a nuisance in some contexts, and a threat to waters that aren't overstocked commercials or moribund rivers.

You will never stop otters turning up on a water like that. No matter how many you kill or move it will keep on happening.

The only answer for a water like that for me, is put a fence around it. If you can't afford that, maybe you can't afford that kind of water.

This otter thing is not a new thing that popped up this week. Its been big news for a long time now. 10 years?

 

[thecrow]

Hardly surprising that the trust are crowing about the governments response to the petition, apart from the fact that they had the arrogance to say they were not consulted they are never going to rock the financial boat that provides their wages are they?

The trust are a limited company who have a contract in place with the EA and NE until 31st March 2019 they contribute between them £1,750,519 each year which is 61% of their funding. These self appointed saviours of angling should be ashamed that the interests of anglers comes after their own.

 

[thecrow]

What a turn around by the Angling Trust, having tried without success to discredit the BS petition they have now done a complete u turn and released this.



This is one of the things ( not releasing injured/orphaned otter back into the wild) I believe that was to be asked for via the petition, hypocrisy in an attempt to placate the 11,000 that signed the petition which I would hazard a guess is a greater number of coarse anglers than they have as members, have they realised that some of the 11,000 would have been members about to become ex members ?

 

[The bad one]

Both you and the Trust need to do some fact checking. But fact checking has never been you strong point!

 

[thecrow]