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

[silvers]

Alan, the crow,

I don’t have any magic answer .... and whilst only 20k people bother to be members of the AT then we’ve got zero chance.

As a comparison, I am very familiar with the badger cull. That has been approved as a long term experiment to determine if rates of Tb in cattle can be reduced. As such it is a trial.
There are c. 300k badgers in the UK, single thousands of otters.
The farmers union represents a significant majority of agricualtural land .... and food security is a government level issue. Unlike our sport catches.
Cows with Tb is itself an animal welfare issue.
There is still very active opposition to the badger culls.

Linking health of fisheries to wider biodiversity and pollution concerns is, in my view, the only way to get any political traction on this. The problem is that most of the ecological groups are likely to be anti or ambivalent to fishing .... as their concern is mainly warm-blooded charismatic mega fauna.
The people who share our concerns the most are likely to be the ones who want to ban fishing!

Like zander in the fens .... I think we will just have to wait for the ecological balance to be found again.

 

[thecrow]

Alan, the crow,

I don’t have any magic answer .... and whilst only 20k people bother to be members of the AT then we’ve got zero chance.

As a comparison, I am very familiar with the badger cull. That has been approved as a long term experiment to determine if rates of Tb in cattle can be reduced. As such it is a trial.
There are c. 300k badgers in the UK, single thousands of otters.
The farmers union represents a significant majority of agricualtural land .... and food security is a government level issue. Unlike our sport catches.
Cows with Tb is itself an animal welfare issue.
There is still very active opposition to the badger culls.

Linking health of fisheries to wider biodiversity and pollution concerns is, in my view, the only way to get any political traction on this. The problem is that most of the ecological groups are likely to be anti or ambivalent to fishing .... as their concern is mainly warm-blooded charismatic mega fauna.
The people who share our concerns the most are likely to be the ones who want to ban fishing!

Like zander in the fens .... I think we will just have to wait for the ecological balance to be found again.

Angling trust members 20k? is that counting the members of clubs that are members and those forced to join to fish matches? I asked earlier in the thread how many individual members it had, I have doubts that its anywhere near 20k but I could be wrong.

As I said in a previous post other groups have their own agenda's, they would use our numbers and then cast us aside much as the fox hunting fraternity tried to do.

Government are not interested in the state of our rivers they pay lip service to it but do nothing really, the amount of rivers in good health after 18 years of the WFD proves it just 17% have attained good status and that is a relatively modest target, if I thought there was a way to get them to listen other than another gunpowder plot I would back that as well but there isn't as far as I know anything happening, that's why I believe in backing this petition.

Doing nothing is not an option being afraid of upsetting others is not an option and imo saying this petition is not the way forward without having an alternative to put forward is not an option that will result in improvements.

The petition now has over 9000 signatures in less than a week I would say that's more than the number of individual trust members.

 

[steve2]

9000 didn’t think it would that many.
I think you will find 99% of anglers including most it would seem on here couldn't give a toss about what is happening on waters they don't fish. Be it cormorants, otters, pollution, over abstraction as long as it does affect them it’s nothing to with them.

Governments have no interest in solving environmental problems that why all dates they set are 20,30, 40 years in the future then no one can blame them when their promises are broken.

 

[108831]

A!ex,although you make some valid points,the badger cull will continue,statistics will be written in such a way so as to allow the expansion of said cull,our rivers hold a captive larder for all predators(and pollutants),no one cares about fish,apart from the fact they feed our avian and mammal predators,just because groups may be going to target angling if we take a stance against otters,does that mean we should say nothing,couldn't imagine the RSPB doing so,in fact I think they have made some sort of comment themselves,not a hundred percent on that. We mustn't be silent,we must bring the concerns of anglers into the public domain,even if it is a percentage of the total who fish,as Peter said,he would have possibly put his Monica on this petition if it was worded differently,I'm sure there are many more in his position...

Sadly the trust have turned out to be what the NFA were before them,leaders of an apathetic army,who don't want to be led and want to hide behind their brollies...

We are the eyes and ears of the waterways,the antis don't like this but it is a fact,the vast majority of us really care about our waters and what lives in and around it,including otters,but fish are as important as them.

 

[silvers]

Alan,

I’m ready to stand up and be dcounted to protect our sport on nearly every issue: pollution, abstraction, global warming, overpopulation .... even alien predators like signal crayfish, mink and cormorants. Otters, for me, are a step too far for the reasons that i’ve outlined. My opinion is that rallying against them will do us more harm than good. However, i’ve been wrong before .... perhaps we should get Nigel Farage to lead the campaign and tell people that those nasty otters have only thrived due to EU policies?

 

[mikench]

Alan,

.... perhaps we should get Nigel Farage to lead the campaign and tell people that those nasty otters have only thrived due to EU policies?

The same can be said for him and UKIP!:wh

 

[The bad one]

Anybody reading the Runawayers (Mr Pope) FB page? The guy's lost it, he's raising as a realistic possibility that Otters will attack children as one of the reason why they should be controlled! Now according to the believers a thunderbolt could hit my house sent by the All Mighty killing me stone dead for my Atheist views. A possibility maybe......not very much, but is about as unlikely as me find a field of unicorns galloping around the local country park.

 

[jasonbean1]

I watched des taylor interview him on facebook and I could not believe des taylors attitude, I signed the petition but after watching the pair of them I wish I hadn't.

 

[Peter Jacobs]

Anybody reading the Runawayers (Mr Pope) FB page? The guy's lost it, he's raising as a realistic possibility that Otters will attack children as one of the reason why they should be controlled! Now according to the believers a thunderbolt could hit my house sent by the All Mighty killing me stone dead for my Atheist views. A possibility maybe......not very much, but is about as unlikely as me find a field of unicorns galloping around the local country park.

Did you see BS member who quoted on their forum that he had signed up his mother using a "spare e-mail address ad prompting others to do the same with their family members?

 

[thecrow]

My wife has signed it after seeing the damage done to wildlife other than fish, so its not just anglers that have signed it.

If the person you mention has done that without his mothers knowledge its imo wrong but I see nothing wrong with asking others that don't fish to look at it.

 

[108831]

There is no such thing as a nasty otter,it is just doing what otters do,simples,most non-anglers that have had their ponds emptied want to kill them,if any otter is good for your rivers wellbeing I'd be amazed,the amount of non-anglers that don't realise where their coots,ducks and moorhens go,I get asked regularly,or when there is a cignet dead,that's because they are cute furry things....Oh,don't they eat children too... :wh

 

[thecrow]

Over 10,000 have now signed the petition, how long before the Trust realise the strength of feeling among anglers?

 

[fishface1]

Less than 1% of anglers who have bought a licence....

 

[thecrow]

Less than 1% of anglers who have bought a licence....

Which goes to show how apathetic some anglers are or are you suggesting that the other 99% don't agree with the aims of the petition, I would suggest that a large proportion of those licence buyers haven't even heard of the petition as they use neither FB or forums.

There was a post on here earlier in the thread that said if an anglers water isn't affected they don't care and how true that is, how many of those will regret not trying to do something when their waters do get affected?

How many rod licences are purchased by game anglers?

 

[108831]

Also how many believe in the petition in real terms,but fear for angling if they show their feelings,too many to mention I'd bet.

 

[Graham Elliott 1]

Re...
There was a post on here earlier in the thread that said if an anglers water isn't affected they don't care and how true that is.

Yes. I believe it was me.
Many have not experienced the effect on rivers like the Kennet.

At least the BS are finally trying to do something.

Five years after they were told by me and others, with many on their Commitee then ignoring or denying the problem.

But, as I said before, to have an effect, the initiatives should have started then.

Press releases showing gutted fish, swans being attacked, fluffy ducklings being eaten, koi ponds with all the fish on the poolside etc.

Throughout the media, all aspects from National Press to TV to Internet. A proper professional campaign with professional spokespeople.

And meanwhile, YOUR representatives the Angling Trust with supposed political influence?

After all this time? Splinters from the fence sitting.

So, no wonder most anglers don't care apart from those affected.

 

[thecrow]

Also how many believe in the petition in real terms,but fear for angling if they show their feelings,too many to mention I'd bet.

Lots Alan, it was the same with the lead shot debacle where anglers just rolled over and accepted everything while others continued to put lead shot into waters while shooting.

 

[Neil Maidment]

Re...
There was a post on here earlier in the thread that said if an anglers water isn't affected they don't care and how true that is.

Yes. I believe it was me.
Many have not experienced the effect on rivers like the Kennet.

At least the BS are finally trying to do something.

Five years after they were told by me and others, with many on their Commitee then ignoring or denying the problem.

But, as I said before, to have an effect, the initiatives should have started then.

Press releases showing gutted fish, swans being attacked, fluffy ducklings being eaten, koi ponds with all the fish on the poolside etc.

Throughout the media, all aspects from National Press to TV to Internet. A proper professional campaign with professional spokespeople.

And meanwhile, YOUR representatives the Angling Trust with supposed political influence?

After all this time? Splinters from the fence sitting.

So, no wonder most anglers don't care apart from those affected.

I sadly concur with the historic ineptitude Graham. I certainly care but did not sign the BS sponsored Petition and as you know first hand I fish some of the affected rivers.

I've seriously thought about it since the petition first appeared and was most definitely wavering with that initial choice. But now I'm totally convinced the petition is naive in its aim and wording and will potentially set back any progress even further. My opinion is further reinforced by the nature of subsequent comments from some of the leading voices, especially recently by Steve Pope. I have a lot of time for Steve ever since I met him on the banks of the Severn years ago. But on this one, he's so far off the mark it's almost funny but sadly isn't.

I have no doubt whatsoever the signature numbers will grow but I'm expecting nothing more than the normal Westminster response when petitions reach this first stage: an acknowledgement and then a response generated by a consultation emanating from a nondescript Committee Room in the bowels of Parliament saying "non-lethal methods are already in existence". Anyone expecting a full debate in The House, and there seems to be a few, is going to be severely disappointed.

 

[The bad one]

....Oh,don't they eat children too... :wh

They will according to the Bible of the Pope.

PJ I did indeed see the comment you refer to. No doubt such comments will find there way to the Civil Servants who will have to respond to this petition

Nothing wrong with seeking to persuade family and friends to support your aims, far far different to use coercion and dammed right fraud as that guy admitted to.

 

[no-one in particular]

Contraception and neutering will never happen, development and testing will take years and immense finances ( from somewhere). The problems to overcome are enormous, here's a short section from a paper on badgers to give you an idea. Bearing in mind badgers have had millions upon millions of £££s chucked at the problem over the years.

Developing an effective oral contraceptive has also proved difficult, and testing the contraceptive without distressing the badgers by taking blood samples to verify whether they are pregnant has led to some innovative ideas of measuring the hormone progesterone in other bodily fluids, that can predict pregnancy with surprising accuracy.

If these drugs are successfully developed, how can they be introduced to the wild without other animals eating them? Containers designed to be opened by badgers have been developed, but would they stand up to an inquisitive squirrel? What about a child? That’s not to mention any potential environmental impact from releasing these drugs into a wild badger population.

Could there be a scent that would deter otters taking up residence, the sent of a dog otter maybe; being very territorial would this deter other otters from moving in; could the scent be produced artificially? Something put in the water that otters could not tolerate, non harmful and non detectable by humans.