ATr on Radio 4 this morning

Matthew Nightingale (ACA) · Jan 26, 2011

Early birds will have heard Mark Lloyd give a well considered intereview with the BBC (on Farming Today - Wednesday 26th Jan) about cormorant predation. Thought the angling position was well explained and a well tempered exchange with the RSPB followed. No great conclusions but at least we are getting 'air time'.

peter crabtree · Jan 26, 2011

just listened to it on BBC iplayer. As you say no great conclusions..........

Colin Brett · Jan 26, 2011

Matthew Nightingale (ACA) said:
Early birds will have heard Mark Lloyd give a well considered intereview with the BBC (on Farming Today - Wednesday 26th Jan) about cormorant predation. Thought the angling position was well explained and a well tempered exchange with the RSPB followed. No great conclusions but at least we are getting 'air time'.

On BBC iPlayer and it's the first item on!!

BBC iPlayer - Farming Today: 26/01/2011

Fred Bonney · Jan 26, 2011

What comes across to me is that there are licences available to cull, but nobody seems to take them up!
There are methods of fish protection that could be installed, but nobody seems to take them up!

So the moans and groans go on, but those with the ability to do something to help themselves, don't appear to want to help themselves...

Peter Jacobs · Jan 26, 2011

Fred Bonney said:
What comes across to me is that there are licences available to cull, but nobody seems to take them up!
There are methods of fish protection that could be installed, but nobody seems to take them up!

So the moans and groans go on, but those with the ability to do something to help themselves, don't appear to want to help themselves...

That is strictly not true Fred.

To start with you try obtaining a license and experience the hoops of fire that you have to jump through, and only then; 'after all other methods have failed'

It takes forever to obtain a license!

As for 'protection measures' - how on earth can you 'protect' 3 miles of river, both banks for example? The simple answer is that you cannot.

It is about time that the Angling Trust took a hard line, (on something) and stopped sitting on the fence.

jef bertels · Jan 26, 2011

Most of the public wouldn't be bothered about slimy, cold fish they never see being plundered by cormorants, so what do you chaps reckon the best way to 'sell' killing cormorants to the general public would be?

Do they compete with kingfishers and out-muscle them for example? In the public eye that could be 'Evil looking big black bully bird vs stunningly beautiful flash of electric blue.'

Is the science there to show kingfishers are in decline as a result? Could we use kingfishers as our 'poster child'?

Any other ideas?

Peter Jacobs · Jan 26, 2011

Why should Anglers be apolgists Steve?

Why do we need a 'poster-species'?

You see, this is where the Angling Trust is failing in my considered opinion.

Angling is a legitimate pass-time, and as such we need no other apologetic gestures of any kind.

robhale · Jan 26, 2011

Thanks for posting the iPlayer link - a search on BBC.co.uk reveal nothing. (Quelle surprise eh?).

Unfortunately they did not let Mark counter the last argument from the RSPB, who is unfortunately completely ignorant of any measures or their effectiveness.

On smaller waters it is possible to deploy tapes, nets, floating fish refuges etc. However these can be quite ineffective, the refuges concentrate the fish and on larger waters, they are completely pointless.

The damage cormorants do to any fishery is quite something to behold.

Onwards and upwards, hopefully the BBC will consider more coverage of angling matters for the 20%+ of the population who have been fishing.

geoffmaynard · Jan 26, 2011

Peter Jacobs said:
That is strictly not true Fred.

To start with you try obtaining a license and experience the hoops of fire that you have to jump through, and only then; 'after all other methods have failed'

It takes forever to obtain a license!

As for 'protection measures' - how on earth can you 'protect' 3 miles of river, both banks for example? The simple answer is that you cannot.

Absolutely. Spot on Peter. The truth is these licenses are a political fob-off. If they meant it, they would pay us for the beak of every cormorant we handed in to them. I believe this method was used in the 50's and very effective it was too.

jef bertels · Jan 26, 2011

Peter Jacobs said:
Angling is a legitimate pass-time

But killing other living things with a nest full of fluffy babies to feed just cos they interfere with our Saturday afternoon sport isn't.

That's how the public will see it. It would be very easy with one well-aimed documentary on prime time TV to turn mass opinion against us on this.

That's why we need a strong message and a reason why the public will agree they need culling. "Because they eat fish and lose money for fishery owners" isn't going to cut it.

Every good campaign has one or more 'poster childs' people buy into.

Peter Jacobs · Jan 26, 2011

thames_steve said:
Every good campaign has one or more 'poster childs' people buy into.

. . . . . and is about as effective as throwing cotton wool balls at them while shouting "go away nasty cormorants"!

F.o.B adverts are what gets Joe Public going, ask any advertising executive.

The truth is that these birds are affecting our sport, that we pay dearly for, and yes, they are compromising fishery owners' ability to maintain a living.

Try wrapping it up any other way . . . . . . .

jef bertels · Jan 26, 2011

Peter Jacobs said:
The truth is that these birds are affecting our sport, that we pay dearly for, and yes, they are compromising fishery owners' ability to maintain a living.

Agree with all of that. The general public won't give a t* ss though.

Especially when one of the clued-up RSPB establishment gets a news article on TV showing fluffy birds lying dead that anglers killed.

Anglers have got to be cute on this one.

Matthew Nightingale (ACA) · Jan 26, 2011

....and lets not forget that the RSPB can claim hundreds of thousands of voters; sorry members.

Public perception is everything I'm afraid; especially to a politician. You have only to follow the badger cull debate to see them back away from what they know has to be done.

As Steve says it only needs a film of starving cormorant chicks, perhaps cut with that picture of an angler with his shotgun and a pile of dead birds and we're truly scre*ed. We are going to have to play this so carefully.

We need to keep on at our politicians, through all the groups that we have, until they start to get an inkling about how many angling voters are really pi**ed off and then maybe they'll listen.

904_cannon · Jan 26, 2011

Peter Jacobs said:
That is strictly not true Fred.

To start with you try obtaining a license and experience the hoops of fire that you have to jump through, and only then; 'after all other methods have failed'

It takes forever to obtain a license!

As for 'protection measures' - how on earth can you 'protect' 3 miles of river, both banks for example? The simple answer is that you cannot.

It is about time that the Angling Trust took a hard line, (on something) and stopped sitting on the fence.

Not our (DCAC) experience Peter, and we have been encouraged to shoot the full quota, if you don't use it you lose it.

EA have also been very proactive in carrying out sonar testings to locate suitable areas of river to install in-river refuges and have carried out the relevant work/permissions re sightings in order not to interfere with boat traffic.

The EA has even created an off-river fish refuge to help protect juvenile fish during the high floods the river suffers from

jimmy crackedcorn · Jan 26, 2011

Agree with the two last posts totally. Not that I agree with the pastime itself, but I'm sure any ex-fox hunters will say the same story as well and they were chasing what is offically vermin, it was a legitamate pastime and labour/left wing/animal rights etc etc turned and mobilised public opinion of the chattering middle classes.

Handle this carefully. Show some grebes without ickle babies because the big bad pike ate their little 'uns because the bigger badder cormorants ate the big bad pikes normal food. I'm not sure its the best example but its better route than "its spoiling my fun"

jef bertels · Jan 26, 2011

john m h said:
EA have also been very proactive in carrying out sonar testings to locate suitable areas of river to install in-river refuges and have carried out the relevant work/permissions re sightings in order not to interfere with boat traffic.

That sounds a great idea John.

Do you know if this been done elsewhere to good effect? What form do the refuges take? Anyone have any pics?

Fred Bonney · Jan 26, 2011

Still sounds like easy excuses to me Peter.
Anyway the item was mainly about lakes, on the whole rivers have built in sancturies for fish.

stu_the_blank · Jan 26, 2011

Received an ATr e-newsletter today outlining the result of the meeting with the Minister. Cormarants and the licencing of control are high on the agenda. They are asking for some input.

Quote:

'The Angling Trust will be inviting its members to contribute to the review by providing examples of the impact of cormorants, mergansers and goosanders and how their angling and fish stocks have been damaged, and to report their experience of the current licensing regime by post or to cormorants@anglingtrust.net'

I'm sure that FM will post the whole of the newsletter in due course.

This is going to be a very tough nut to crack but, just maybe, we have an opprtunity to state our side of the argument.

904_cannon · Jan 26, 2011

Latest Wear newsletter HERE
This particular fish 'haven' was created from the Durham Grand Canyon
a 'big hole' that appeared during the summer floods of 2009
I contacted the EA at the time and suggested it might make a good fish refuge, particularly as the land owners said they did not intend filling it back in. I was told then it couldn't be done?

Perhaps the next stage would be to install wires/tape accross the refuge. We succesfully taped a canal type stillwater we have at our Brasside fishery, the farmer who cant count (to more than two

) shoots the birds on the bigger waters we have.

I believe the Tyne has had fish havens/refuges created as has the Swale through the Swale Preservation Society.

Specifically on the cormorant issue, it's a great shame, and disgrace, that Martin Read was allowed to leave the ATr

geoffmaynard · Jan 26, 2011

jimmy crackedcorn said:
Handle this carefully. Show some grebes without ickle babies because the big bad pike ate their little 'uns because the bigger badder cormorants ate the big bad pikes normal food. I'm not sure its the best example but its better route than "its spoiling my fun"

Or show starving cormorant chicks starving because the otters have eaten all their food - or vice versa ?

ATr on Radio 4 this morning

Well-known member

AKA Simon, 1953 - 2022 (RIP)

Well-known member

Banned

Moderator

Well-known member

Moderator

Well-known member

Content Editor

Well-known member

Moderator

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Banned

Well-known member

Well-known member

Content Editor