Black Death

S

stuart palfrey

Guest
I have now got a licence to shoot these birds on a certain water,and bagged my first last saturday.I must say it was a thrill for me after seeing first hand the trouble they cause,a local lake is now all but wiped out of all fish in just 3 years.It is like the life blood has been sucked from it.It felt like revenge for me,bloody daft or what but that is how i felt.Don't get me wrong i would not want cormorants totaly wiped from the face of the earth,but they must be controlled.
 
R

Ron 'The Hat' Clay

Guest
Go and get some more Stuart.

Need some cash for cartridges?
 

woody

Very Elderly Member
Banned
Joined
Feb 17, 2005
Messages
74
Reaction score
0
Well done. How many more on your licence?
 

Joskin

New member
Joined
Feb 24, 2004
Messages
0
Reaction score
0
I know exactly how you feel Stuart. I got a licence in October and I still cheer every time I shoot one. (only shot two so far though Honest). They seem to be able to take quit a bit of lead to bring them down as they have such a hard breast plate. I was considering mincing one up and feeding it to the carp that we are rearing on in our stock tanks just to let them get there Owen back.
 
S

stuart palfrey

Guest
Joskin,you need No.4 shot,but you can bring the buggers down with size 6 if close enough.Adrian i have not opened one up,they are so horrible to touch let alone do a autopsy. Interestingly i was fishing the wye today and watched one fly off with a large chub,it was much to big to swallow,so it dropped it,the chub floated off very dead. .....This fish could have made somebody's day.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!..
 

Adrian Chubb

New member
Joined
Jul 1, 2003
Messages
0
Reaction score
0
Stuart,

It would be interesting to know what quantity and size of fish they consume. I know a fishery owner that opened up several and found some very nice quality roach inside and up to 3lb of fish being digested.
 
N

NottmDon

Guest
The bigger picture needs to be looked at with regard to cormorants, why are sea and estuary birds coming so far inland? Ive read that the species we have do live inland, theres so much conflicting opinion that its hard to grasp the truth. Fishery owners do, in my opinion have a right to protect their investment. Theres no doubt these birds have caused havoc in Nottingham. Maybe finding their nesting sites and pricking eggs would be a better solution to control? At least to the general public it would seem more palatable. With a body as big as the RSPB fighting their corner the cormorants have a lot of clout! If I were shooting these birds the last thing I'd do would be to air it on a public forum and give the antis more ammunition to use against anglers.
 
S

stuart palfrey

Guest
NottmDom,as i have said i would not want to totaly wipe out these birds,but they need to be controled,and the best way is to KILL them.....
 

Andy Stafford

New member
Joined
Oct 20, 2004
Messages
0
Reaction score
0
I've resisted the urge to post on this topic (up until now anyway) as all the arguments for and against the cull have already been aired on a previous thread.

However, I'm with NottmDon on this one. Even if earlier posters on here are personally at peace with killing cormorants, do you have to be so triumphalist and public about it? Angling regularly gets a bad press, deservedly so sometimes, is it really necessary to invite more by crowing about how great it feels to be killing birds that are only doing what comes naturally?
 
S

stuart palfrey

Guest
Andy,its not a case of what comes naturlly,as they are not fresh water birds but are sea enviroment birds.And if you don't like the thought of killing sweet little mr.cormorant,then don't do it,but please refrain from decrying me for doing what should have been done a long time ago. I might add i like your pun about crowing about killing birds..!!!!..
 

Andy Stafford

New member
Joined
Oct 20, 2004
Messages
0
Reaction score
0
Stuart,
I should have made the "doing naturally" comment clearer. Cormorants have come onto freshwater fisheries because greedy, short sighted fishermen have been allowed to damn nearly empty the north sea by politicians too spineless to take appropriate corrective action. The cormorants will do what they have to do in order to survive i.e. move inland. Plain and simple, doing what comes naturally.

I can understand the frustrations of angler's whose fisheries have been decimated by cormorants, indeed one of my own waters has been impacted. However, the cull is not IMO going to have a significant long term remedial impact on the problem. Too few birds to be killed, culled birds will be replaced by new arrivals from Europe and the coasts, constant effort cormorant vigilance will be required at fisheries over an extended period to be effective at the local level. And last but not least it paints anglers in an exremely poor light.

Personally I don't particularly like cormorants and certainly don't regard them as sweet. But I do respect them in exactly the same way as I respect any other creature (apart from mossies!). They are the victims of man's arrogance and ignorance.

So apart from the fact that I think the cull is basically a waste of time as it does nothing to address the real problem, I see its public celebration as making a bad situation worse. As fishing comes under more pressure from the antis in years to come, comments like yours will be used against us to swing public opinion their way. Not to mention the birdwatchers' reaction to your comments. Let's not make it any easier for them please.
 
W

Wolfman Woody

Guest
Andy, not sure your first paragraph is entirely correct. I have a RSPB report that suggests in 1980 that there were no cormorants between the Hunber estuary and the Isle of white.

Birds north of the Humber may have come inland, but the fellows down here have come from Wales and the Severn estuary. Some of this is because of oil spillages in the estuary by tankers and especially the Sea Empress that went down 10 years ago (about).

That incident, although cleaned up on the land, left a 1 foot thick carpet of sludge on the sea bed over quite an area. The trawlermen aren't blameless, just not the sole culprits.
 

Adrian Chubb

New member
Joined
Jul 1, 2003
Messages
0
Reaction score
0
Could it be that the food source that attracts these birds is artificially high stocking levels in inland waterways ? I am sure that there is some truth in the fished out seas theory but equally, if there was not easy pickings to be had, would cormorants move inland. My point is, this situation has been caused in part by the demand for angling. The EA is partly financed by the demand for angling via licence fees and has a duty to protect our fish stocks. Should we be looking for the EA to help resolve this problem ?
 
N

NottmDon

Guest
No doubt if my lively hood depended on it I would be looking at ways to protect my investment. I do feel the bigger picture needs to be looked at though. The rape of our seas cannot go on, the continental fleets will empty them if left unchecked and then they will set their eyes on our inland waters and fish no doubt! Joe public doesnt care if the cormorants eat inland fish, they see a feathered friend that looks kinda cute in the nature reserves and the RSPB butter them up with their publicity machine. I can think of no greater adverse publicityto our sport than anglers (including me) saying how chuffed they are to be allowed to shoot these birds. It is something that the antis and the RSPB will be looking for as they can then discredit our "eyes and ears of the waterways, being at one with nature" image that so many anglers use to defend our sport at present. Its sad that fishery owners and managers need to cull these birds, sad but required unfortunately. The bigger picture needs addressing, and we need to be very diplomatic about it, even those who are overjoyed that the kid gloves are off so to speak.
 
E

ED (The ORIGINAL and REAL one)

Guest
NottmDon you said
" I can think of no greater adverse publicity to our sport than anglers (including me) saying how chuffed they are to be allowed to shoot these birds. It is something that the antis and the RSPB will be looking for as they can then discredit our "eyes and ears of the waterways, being at one with nature" image that so many anglers use to defend our sport at present. Its sad that fishery owners and managers need to cull these birds, sad but required
unfortunately"

What they are doing is entirely within the law -- they have licences to do it
 
N

NottmDon

Guest
Dont dispute that at all ED. I was trying to point out that joe public will be fed by the publicity machine of the RSPB and PETA. The last line of the words you quote "sad but required" clearly states my opinion. Lawful or not makes not a jot of difference to the public, fox hunting was lawful now its not and anglers will face the same publicity machine that the fox hunters had to face. No doubt as a group the fox hunting fraternity are much better organised and "together" than anglers could ever hope to be.We need to be more publicity aware than we are at present was the point I was making. Contrary to the popular cliche "all publicity is good publicity" bad publicity stinks! one picture of two owls recently should prove that. It may have been a lazy anglers line, it may have been done by extreme animal activists but how many votes would a picture like that sway if there was ever a referendum to end angling? Thats my point Ed I'm not having a go at anyone for shooting what they consider a threat to their fisheries as can clearly be seen if my comments are read.
 
E

ED (The ORIGINAL and REAL one)

Guest
You were 'having a go'at Stuart and Joskin for airing their views ,when in fact they are doing NOTHING at all wrong...they are controlling what have now become a problem ..... What if it were rats(vermin in another guise) they were shooting would you still say the same ???
 
Top