Decline in Barbel Populations

[Ray Wood 1]

Agreed Benny, it's Mother Nature at work.

Is that what you think Phil?

Interestingly the "National Organisation for all Barbel Anglers" may be able to shed some light on this issue. They have been running a national spawning survey for several years now. I wonder if that survey has turned anything up regarding the decline in barbel stocks in some of our rivers?

I have not seen any comments from them anywhere, have you?

Regards
Ray

 

[benny samways]

The problem with issues such as this is that there are so many variables at play and no actual standard measures for what constitutes a healthy river or barbel population. Subsequently, trying to isolate variables at the source of the problem is really difficult.

As anglers were can observe patterns and cycles etc but the conclusions we draw are pure conjecture.

The minute you try to highlight this or turn the debate into establishing baselines from which comparisons are possible you are faced with the reality of how impossible this is. It could be done but anglers want quick answers and to point the finger at east targets. As for the EA, why would they want to establish what actually is a healthy fish population as then they would be truely capable when stocks dont measure up.

As for the oestronised pellet theory, the OP on the BFW thread actually asked people to shoot his theory down. When some did he used it to reinforce the theory? Couldnt get my head round that.

It is a good thread though and has highlighted how pellet manufacturers thought coarse anglers would only use the coarse fish pellets for feed and not be using the salmon products etc for targetting coarse species. Also that the manufacturers would put the onus on anglers to stop using the potentially bad pellets in favour of the coarse pellets instead.

Im glad I use boilies and hemp!

 

[Judas Priest]

Ray, not seen or heard anything. Perhaps they are as they say "working behind the scenes".

Although if they think 4 phone calls a day is hard work it may take them a while

 

[Graham Elliott 1]

OK. I am awaiting quite a lot of information.But from the research so far. And I think that this is vitally important to barbel Anglers and Anglers in general

.Taken from one of the Major Fish Farming Product Producers Catelogue.

The feed must match the species, size, biology,environment and health of the fishOne of the Companies has advised that the incorrect feed could have a detrimental effect on the health of the fish.

This is not an unknown area and quite a lot of research has been carried out in relation to high oil content and enlarged livers.*I don't believe what effect this, and possibly other effects could have on reproduction capability.It seems that certainly one of the companies do not track end buyer usage of the product. ie fishing Bait suppliers
.I believe that one particular large use type of product available from different bait companies is simply a food for use as salmon feed in enclosed conditions.Certainly not meeting the stated requirements.The feed must match the species, size, biology,environment and health of the fish

Large bait size, other sizes similar Oil 34%Protein 29%Fibre 3%Ash 4.9%Calcium 0.8%Phospherous 0.9%I am aware these totals do not add up to 100pc but are as supplied.I believe this formulation is SPECIFICALLY for salmonoid fish

My research continues.*

---------- Post added at 15:30 ---------- Previous post was at 15:16 ----------

Ok.A reply to some of my queries from one of the Aquaculture Scientists. And my follow up email.

Hello Graham*Thank you for the interesting discussion we had this week. I've talked to the account manager for our bait customers, and have a better overview of supply now. As indicated in our conversation - our supply is infrequent , and we will take on board your comments at the next opportunity for discussion with our customers*The customers buying pelleted diets from us for angling purposes are offered a range of diet types with various fat levels.*· · These diets are always supplied and labelled by us as salmonid feed.*· · Our relationship with these bait market customers, is as a supplier of raw material, and we have no control on any additional processing (oils, flavouring, mixing), modification, product claims or usage thereafter.*· · Uncontrolled and excessive release of any compound feed, or any organic material into the aquatic environment is not recommended, and in the aquaculture industry, we work closely with our farming customers to drive down feed use and improve efficiency.*· ·

Our main competence is in salmonid feed and nutrition and we would not speculate on the effects of other species consuming an unbalanced diet.
However to take an example of one effect, an imbalance in fat composition in salmon and trout can result in excessive fat deposition in the gut and other organs.*· ·
If use of such products in an uncontrolled manner is a possible source of the issue which you describe, then we would advise the most effective course of action for you would be to approach the end users of such products and promote/educate sensible use of such feeds in our waterways.

The sellers of the feed to anglers should also be involved, and encouraged to develop more appropriate products.*· ·

Should those buyers of our feed for bait use require a change in composition of their feed pellets for supply going forward, then, we will of course respond to this accordingly.

We understand your concerns, and urge you to take up the suggestions on the best points of leverage for this issue.i.e. the anglers and the end-point suppliers of bait products*I hope this helps.*Regards*__________________________________________________ __

_Hello*Thank you very much for your response to some of my queries and for recognising our concern.In a particular case, for example Elips Pellets that EWOS I understand sell to a number of bait companies, would you consider the analysis of the product suitable or desirable for Cyprinid species.


This given that your comment regarding fatty deposits and any other possible side effects from uncontrolled use.?
Given the declared duty of care regarding fish welfare, do you feel that EWOS responsibilities should extend to how your product is being applied by the end User?

Surely due diligence should be part of the selling process?I applaud your decision to take on board more detailed discussions with the bait buyers of your products regarding suitability (if I read that correctly) Would you indeed be contacting them to indicate what the product ranges available to them should ideally be based upon to try and negate any potential problems.?
Indeed your suggestion of tackling the problem from the Anglers/retail bait company perspective is one we are currently discussing. Education is the key prior to any potential legislation.

Lastly I would thank you for taking time out from your valuable workload to look at this matter. As I mentioned that at the moment there is no product on the market that is labelled as "Fish safe"*If you could respond to those few remaining queries It would be much appreciated

.Kind Regards Graham Elliott

---------- Post added at 15:41 ---------- Previous post was at 15:30 ----------

Angling baits and invasive crayfish as important trophic subsidies for a large cyprinid fish - Springer

They do eat a lot.

 

[bennygesserit]

I thought Maverick posted a similar , and very popular , thread and quite a few said it was the way he was fishing , are you sure there is an actual decline in Barbel and its not down to bait , or methods or frankly overfishing.

 

[Graham Elliott 1]

Whichever way you look at it over 75 percent of anglers thought their river was in decline. Of those two thirds thought in serious decline.

Not scientific but surely an excellent indicator.

The food manufacturers clearly say that their product is not for cyprinid species.

Apart from liver damage they say the products meant for salmon farms Will have a detrimental effect on the fish.

There is no research to my knowledge of the long term outcomes from incorrect feed being applied.

Its fairly obvious that smaller rivers may suffer in the first instance. This is certainly true in the Thames Valley areas.

My main concern is the outcomes from when these salmon products were pretty much the only ones avaliable during the first few years of the pellet boom.

One question we should ask ourselves is why have so many of the commercial fisheries banned these products.
Do our riverine environments not deserve the same protection?

Surely more research is needed.

Graham

 

[The bad one]

TBO just out of interest and it's a serious question, how many juvenile barbel have you seen trapped in these depressions or were they all juvenile silvers ?

The barbel has evolved over centuries to cope with water flows and that includes increased water flows during flooding, as flooding is not a modern phenomenon.

Dolly mixtures of all species Phil. Even brown trout and salmon parr.
All riverine species have evolved to cope with floods nothing more special about small barbel year 0-1 in flooded conditions than the rest, they seek shelter wherever they can find it, as do all species and that's takes them into such areas.
Never suggest flooding was new, but would state categorically that the intensity of and thereby flow velocity of flooding has increased greatly over the last 30+ years.
You can’t continue to concrete, tarmac and remove the land/forest sponge effect over the whole catchment areas, without the water getting into the rivers as quick and as fast as possible and thereby increasing the two above.

 

[benny samways]

Whichever way you look at it over 75 percent of anglers thought their river was in decline. Of those two thirds thought in serious decline.

Not scientific but surely an excellent indicator.

The food manufacturers clearly say that their product is not for cyprinid species.

Apart from liver damage they say the products meant for salmon farms Will have a detrimental effect on the fish.

There is no research to my knowledge of the long term outcomes from incorrect feed being applied.

Its fairly obvious that smaller rivers may suffer in the first instance. This is certainly true in the Thames Valley areas.

My main concern is the outcomes from when these salmon products were pretty much the only ones avaliable during the first few years of the pellet boom.

One question we should ask ourselves is why have so many of the commercial fisheries banned these products.
Do our riverine environments not deserve the same protection?

Surely more research is needed.

Graham

Be careful Graham, you are inferring a lot from what that guy replied to you.



They are very careful to NOT say that their products are unhealthy to coarse fish.

An unbalanced diet is what the guy refers to, not their pellet. He then goes onto say that an imbalance of fat composition is unhealthy in trout and salmon.

He also says that their products are marketed as for Salmonoids. He doesnt say they are NOT for cyprinids.

He also says that the leveredge must come from the anglers who sourced this bait in the first place.

They have done their due diligence, they research how their products effect Salmonoids and clearly label the products as such. It was anglers who sought them out and anglers who should stop using them if they are not suitable for coarse fish.

The low oil coarse trout pellet has been around just as long as the oilyer ones.

ATB
Benny

 

[Judas Priest]

TBO I'd agree that over recent years we are suffering more because of the plans of the 60's to 90's of straightening and defoliating river systems. It would appear that we still haven't learned our lessons though as after the last big floods every Tom **** and Harry with a house on a flood plain was screaming for the water to go even faster towards the sea.

Makes me laugh when they build flood defences at Bewdley then look on in astonishment as the next bit downstream then floods so they build defences there only to see the problem pushed further down.

 

[Graham Elliott 1]

Benny, cheers.

I have a statement from them that says the salmon feed would be detrimental to cyprinid fish.

I also think what they haven't said. Eg. Perfectly safe etc is more telling.

Any idea why commercials have banned this type of pellet on their waters?

As I said. Surely worth investigation.

Graham.

 

[Judas Priest]

Afternoon Graham see you're keeping well.

Do you know if anyone has picked up and are running with this or is it just across the 2 forums? I'd have thought the BS research would have got involved, or perhaps they have and I've missed the posts.

Whatever, you've done a great job of researching so far, keep up the good work

 

[Graham Elliott 1]

Hi Phil.

Just to make it clear I think the proven hormones in the water that Lol is pushing is the main ongoing problem for the future of our rivers. However the pace of decline is so rapid this way something has happened. This is an area I have been trying to get the BS involved with.

Not only has this been difficult due to the focus on building spawning beds etc. There is also the usual disruptive BS member banned from everwhere else idiot to deal with.

To say it's been frustrating is an understatement. I have actually given up trying.

I am / was looking for some leadership within the Barbel World to investigate this potential problem.
The
Farmed food fish fed this diet never get to the spawning stage before harvesting.

Every single Professor / Phd I i have spoken to say the diet could affect spawning ability including Prof Malcolm Tyler of Essex University.

Graham

 

[Judas Priest]

Keep on going Graham mate it is appreciated by quite a few of us.

Surprised though that the R&C bit of the BS hasn't been in touch, thought this would be right up their street, as after all it is research leading to conservation.

 

[benny samways]

Benny, cheers.

I have a statement from them that says the salmon feed would be detrimental to cyprinid fish.

I also think what they haven't said. Eg. Perfectly safe etc is more telling.

Any idea why commercials have banned this type of pellet on their waters?

As I said. Surely worth investigation.

Graham.

Definitely Graham. I applaud you for your efforts in highlighting a potential problem. I wasnt digging you out just wanted to be careful that words wernt put in peoples mouthes so to speak as I believe this is something that anglers should think about.

I know an owner of a commercial fishery and he only allows the coarse pellet on his waters. He sells it, so obviously there is a commercial (pun intended) aspect to it, but he could sell the oilier pellets but wont as he says the coarse pellets are what was recommended to him as good healthy food for his fish.

Perhaps, as an indirect result of getting fat, spawning potential is reduced? Fred Crouch pertained to that theory. Further research is needed. I think water quality, reduced flow and silted spawning beds are more significant factors in spawning success but from a fish health perspective the message that high oily pellets could be damaging to coarse fish health needs to be put out there. What about the Anglers Mail or times? Could they help you?

Dynamite baits must have sold tons and tons of halibut pellet to anglers and they sponsor Steve Pope, so, call me cynical but for the BS to fund investigation into this would surely be a compromise of interests? Not a dig at Steve but surely Dynamite wouldnt be happy if the BS came out saying dont use high oil halibuts anymore?

 

[Titus]

Dynamite baits must have sold tons and tons of halibut pellet to anglers and they sponsor Steve Pope, so, call me cynical but for the BS to fund investigation into this would surely be a compromise of interests?

Perhaps this has never occurred to to the BS. Now you've highlighted it for them it will be interesting to see how they react.

 

[binka]

I've been aware of the chemical issue from treated discharge finding its way into rivers ever since the headlines started to appear regularly about twenty years ago and I have to admit a lot of what has been written so far on the subject in this thread is a bit specialist for my understanding.

I will however say that the Trent was reported to hold huge barbel shoals in the early nineteen hundreds in an era where the water quality would surely have been filthy by todays standards but, crucially, devoid of the complex chemicals that are now passed through the treatment system and into our rivers.

For this reason alone I am inclined to think that something chemical is going on rather than angling pressure, predation etc.

 

[Judas Priest]

Dynamite do sponsor SP but as we are constantly told by Steve himself there is a difference between the sponsored angler and the BS Chair and they are not a one man band.
I can see no conflict of interest for the national group for all barbel anglers who have one of their aims and objectives as "to promote the barbel and it's conservation" in taking the lead in this.

 

[Ray Wood 1]

Hi Phi

Not only has this been difficult due to the focus on building spawning beds etc. There is also the usual disruptive BS member banned from everwhere else idiot to deal with.

To say it's been frustrating is an understatement. I have actually given up trying.

I am / was looking for some leadership within the Barbel World to investigate this potential problem.

Graham

Hi Graham,
How can a disruptive BS banned everywhere else member dictate what the BS do? If it is who I think he is no longer on the committee so cannot in my opinion have any affect on decisions made by the BS committee. Are you say that the BS will not take this issue up? Have they actually told you this is the case?

Ade, re Dynamite baits, as far as I can see the chairman of the BS is active on here as I post. Perhaps he would like to comment on both Grahams post and whether or not Dynamite baits have sold these products.

Keep plugging on Graham.

Kind regards
Ray

 

[Graham Elliott 1]

Thanks for the encouragement. Much appreciated.

I think dynamite probably use lower fat products.

But asked SP A week ago to ask them for a breakdown.

All the FFarm producers do different products for carp / cyprinids feeds.

Have a look at the skretting range brochure.

You see why I would like to have a Barbel Group progress this.

Graham

 

[soft plastic]

Yes, all of this is very good but...don't let's forget that barbel are not indigenous to many rivers. How great it would be if we could turn back the clock and find stone loaches, minnows, eels, Bull Heads etc in our rivers. Why the fixation with barbel?

Sent from my D6603 using Tapatalk