Pasties versus otters

I just cannot let this BS pass without mention.

"The returning otter population has, at times, decimated the Stocks of specimen fish in some fisheries. But ?250,000 a year to protect the interests of 2 million anglers has in the past been impossible to find!

Specimen carp are particularly vulnerable, but pike, big eels and tench are taken by the otters as well. Some fisheries have been ruined by such predation, and there is enormous frustration brewing from anglers who fish such waters, as they have been unable to do anything. Otters are fully protected by law; they may not be moved, disturbed or harmed in any way, whatsoever."

Errr, what? Precisely which 'specimen fish' have otters been 'decimating'? (The latter word meaning, to define it properly, reducing by one tenth). 20lb pike? 6lb eels? 7lb tench? Or 40lb carp and 10lb stillwater barbel?

It's absolute rubbish that fisheries have been 'ruined' by otter predation - but that there were enough otters. Have you seen one recently? Can you remember mink being accused (though we've all seen a few of those).

And which anglers are brewing up for a confrontation? Anybody on FM ever mentioned it? And commercial fisheries lacking, between them, at ?10 a day or more, the ?250,000 a lifetime they need for 'otter-proof fencing' whatever that is? Or too stingy to pay for anything but .410 shells?

Am I alone in being able to spare a few average eels and tench, and a whole lot of pasties, to see the occasional otter on the bank? You know, that large mammal shot on sight by riverkeepers for 200 years of persecution, and hunted to the brink of extinction by dogs?

It is a difficult one Mark.
But I think the key phrase is selected fiheries to be protected.
I think that in its self would be a lottery. Once again man is intefering with nature.

Yes Mark you are virtually alone in thinking that!
There is overwhelming evidence on specimen waters from Kent to Cumbria, which have suffered decimation of their fish stocks. Ask Rob Hailes or Fred Sykes, Hence why the EA have put the money up.

That money is there precisely for fencing to avoid conflict between Anglers, water owners, etc and persecution of otters.

Chris Burt of the SAA has worked on this issue for nearly ten years compiling factual evidence on Otter predation and finding workable solutions in partnership with the EA and the Otter Trusts.

Mark I?m not being funny here, but you are a journalist and should know the rules of that profession better than anyone, unless you work for the $hitty tabloids, that being you talk to the people putting out the Press Release to find out the facts before shooting off from the hip.
Had you looked at the SAA site http://www.saauk.org/ under Campaigns Otter Predation you?d be able to make more informed comment on otter predation and fencing.

And I suppose you don't mind the occasional cormorant flying overhead either Mark!

what is your agenda this time mark.i wonder.try brittany for a holiday mark if you like your shooting im sure they will be most accomadating in showing you their trophies and their way of life.otters every were,and the sound of shot guns in the morning lovely place.the french certainly like their outdoor pursuits,and why shouldnt they and you know what i like about em they dont feel guilty,and why should they.

So where is all the evidence? It's not otter fencing I object to, although the notion that between then commercial fisheries can't come up with ?250,000 is doubtful.

I'm all in favour of fencing if it decreases the incidence of fishery owners trapping and killing otters. But I'm in favour of an evidence-based approach to supporting the theory that otters 'decimate' (and by this they really mean 'destroy') commercial fisheries.

Is anyone seriously suggesting, as I said, that otters kill 30lb carp, 20lb pike and 7lb tench? The Wildlife Trusts say: "Work on otter diet has, however, shown that the majority of their food comprises smaller fish species. A recent report looked at otter post mortems and analysed the stomach contents of the dead otters ? there was very little evidence of larger fish forming part of their recent diet."

Other studies have detected the presence of large fish in otters' diet, but nobody could determine whether those fish had been killed by otters or found dead or dying.

The recolonisation of Britain by otters are a sign that the environment is improving, and should be something anglers celebrate. We should be very careful not to launch a campaign - particularly one flawed by misconceptions - against an animal which almost everyone, myself included, thinks is one of our wild treasures.

Yes, Gav, I'd be happy to sacrifice a few fish to see a few otters around. The reality is that, as this report concludes (http://www.english-nature.org.uk/LIFEinUKRivers/species/otter.pdf) otters colonise environmenst where there is a healthy fish population, and move on if there isn't. As the report also concludes, otters are never the reason for fishery decline.

Unless, of course, your aim is to maintain such an unnaturally high biomass to ensure that every angler can catch fish, no matter what his or her skill level. What's out of kilter in that situation? Otters, or anglers?

I must admit I was with Mark on this one after reading the press release.....

Otters severely predating and cleaning out fisheries ????? Purleeeese....

Plus the bs about anglers brewing up for a confrontation. Utter tripe.

If I see an otter once a year I feel lucky and grateful to have seen it and good luck to them all whatever they eat - they have more right to it than we ever do, after years of trapping, hunting, persecution and (the principal former killer) pollution....

I was accordingly all ready to write off this SAA bunch as another bunch of self-interested blinkered idiots until Phil posted the link to their site.

Which was and is a pleasant surprise, a much more balanced and level headed analysis and approach to Angling getting its foot in the door of some public interest and representation at last. Thank God someone is doing it.

Time consuming, difficult, complex and bloody boring dealing with draft legislation, idiots spouting "common sense conclusions" based on no research at all - as Mark points out - and deffo cuts into essential fishing time !

And if they can bullshit a few grands worth of free fencing for those who can probably afford to pay for it anyway but can see a free wallet sparing bandwagon on the horizon... then who am I to begrudge it or even to care ?

Just so long as no-one is suggesting a world in which some idiots advocate starting to shoot Otters again on the basis of more spurious "common sense conclusions" propogated by the friend of a friend I know who is sure the dead fish on the bank was predated by Otters....

For a start I for one have left dead fish in the undergrowth from time to time beside waterways. Generally floating corpses netted out to prevent the spread of any disease or fungal infection if that is what killed them. I would very much regret any idiot thinking that this is evidence of any Otter killings or that they leave fish once killed to go to waste without eating them. Both wrong.

The SAA site just goes to show what a little coordinated response to legislation and PR can do at least - look at the situation with regards to birds summarised in the Cormorant post, every bloody thing completely unnecessarily and absurdly protected care of the various incredibly well over-funded and coordinated Bird charities and pressure groups... If we were that organised the waters would be heaving with fish...

You never know, I might even consider joining up - if only to help ensure that no-one starts suggesting having a go at Otters again (and if Otters why not Pike ? or feral Trout ? or.... u got the idea, hello slippery slope...)

Just so long as no-one is suggesting a world in which some idiots advocate starting to shoot Otters again on the basis of more spurious "common sense conclusions" propogated by the friend of a friend I know who is sure the dead fish on the bank was predated by Otters....

bluddi ell we agree on something evan, now that's a first.

I'm still against the re-introduction of otters without good scientific evidence to show that they will thrive without any detriment to our fisheries.
You just do not put another predator into our waterways unless the current fish population can fully withstand the sustained predation, without detriment to our fishing. For example, some would be up in arms if they suddenly put zander in the Test or Itchen. Both rivers are healthy with a healthy fish population, so why not! As we don't hunt otters any more, then why not just let them multiply naturally. And as you've said, the otters will move on once the healthy fish population has declined. Sorry, I don't want to wait for that to happen again.

No time to shoot the Otters Captain C.... I'm too busy cooking my fish supper....

Bring on the wolves and bears. We have got to accept that the environment in Britian is not what it was 100 - 200- 500 years ago.
Nature abhores a void and when we make a change in any ecosystem it is not into a void but into a place already backfilled by nature. Hence any change we make or allow to happen has a reaction on something exisiting. It is the single agenda group that are to be feared most as they give no allowance for other species. To some extent I can only agree with the earlier writer who mentioned the bird lobby.
In my eyes commercial fishery owners/ fish farms are no different from farmers as far as I can see. Would we allow a wild animal to predate on their stock? Take foxes and poultry. Farmers are allowed to defend there stock actively by culling as well as passively by fencing. So why not on commercial fisheries. Register them and licence them and treat them like a farmer or stables owner and given them the powers to defend their stock, their investment, their livelyhood.

There's always balance.
If the happy medium is disturbed then it has to be addressed.
I choose to fish in locations where wild life & flora are managed and neither is seen to affect the business side.
I enjoy those special encounters one has during a session.
I'm only too well aware that there's also a nasty side involved in keeping the status quo.
What I wouldn't like to see, is it conducted blatantly in front of me.
I see no reason why the necessary nasties utilised to ensure a happy environment, are bandied about in the public domain. Unless as someone has suggested, it's purely a theatrical excercise in obtaining free finance.
These people run a business that keeps the client happy. As a client, I pay them money to be kept happy. I don't want to pay them and do some of it myself.
If they can't manage their businesses without involving the client, to add some weight in their attempts, to grab a bit of some financial pie. Perhaps they should consider turning things over to someone who can.
I neither need .... or want to know.
Other people get paid to do that.

Over-wintering otters, especially females in a holt, do cause mayhem on specimen carp waters every winter.
When the silvers shoal up and they can't find fish in the river otters often find their way to stillwaters where they might then spend the whole winter there. They can catch and kill carp to over 30lb (fairly valuable fish I'm sure you'll agree) whereupon they tend to eat out the ghills and the belly and leave the rest. Big carp are especially vulnerable in the cold weather as they are far easier for the otters to catch.
This often applies to club or syndicate waters, as well as commercial fisheries, many of which barely see an angler all winter (further encouraging the otters to stay near the easy food source).
I don't think this is a measure aimed at commecials per se.
As for shooting an otter with a .410 - that'd just annoy it. Anyone shooting otters risks delivering angling a truly monumental PR disaster! The animals are BAP protected under European law. I think the funding is a solution to avoid idiots shooting them!

Greg thanks for posting that you've save me a job :0)

"I'm still against the re-introduction of otters without good scientific evidence to show that they will thrive without any detriment to our fisheries."

Though some of the growing population (and it's shooting up) are reintroductions, most is just natural osmosis caused by breeding success. And to liken it to zander's going a bit far, since zander weren't here to start with, whereas otters were.

Most of the decline was due, they now think, to pesticide residues in fish concentrating higher in the food chain. So as I say, otters are a sign that things are getting better for everything that swims.

Fence off the fisheries and well done on getting the dosh for it, but if the angling fraternity (and I wholeheartedly agree with positive comments about the SAA in general) makes its points with less emotion and more fact, it's got a much better chance of endearing itself to the environmentalists. And angling has absolutely superb environmental credentials.

Now your talking some sense mark anglers as enviromentalists,that is so true.I dont think you got my point about the bretons though,they like their hunting more than most but the place was full of otters and also fish.The sports fratrernity over there as well as here are enviromentalists and they love the natural world also knowing its seasons and breeding times,They do not want to anialate anything that moves this is totally alien to their beliefs.

I'm not against culling animals. I'm thinking of getting airgun at the moment to convert two local grey squirrels into a pie. The amount of bird food they're eating, they be quite plump and tasty.

There aren't too many otters. Maybe one day there will be, but only if there are a lot more fish about. Populations of predators achieve a natural balance with the amount of prey species around, and Breton's lifting with fish, you say.

If the place is lifting with fish, the 100lb a year an otter might dispose of isn't really going to matter. Hell, I caught almsot half of that in five hours this summer without shifting my arse off a seatbox.

Mark you answered Terry D?s question thus
?Though some of the growing population (and it's shooting up) are reintroductions, most is just natural osmosis caused by breeding success.?

I?ve said this many times on this site on probably every thread that has come up on otters, the SAA under the project management of Chris Burt, got the Otter Trusts to commit to an agreement of no further releases about 5 years ago and that agreement is still in place and holding.

You used the word osmosis. The ecological term used to describe what you are conveying is ?radiation.? As in radiating out from a point source. Whilst what you say is true in areas where otters were still present after the crash from 1968 onwards, it is not true nationwide and the otters being seen in areas where they?d been absent for 30+ years were captive breed animals, released by the Otter trusts. The present ones being seen in those areas today are second, third and probably forth generation creatures.

Without doubt food supply is the greater limiting factor of the numbers of animals, but territory is also an important limiting factor. Otters have very large territories, Males up to 30 km females, smaller 15-20 km. Otters aren?t communal animals and won?t stand others on their territories, it fight or flight when they meet and that goes for both sexes. If they fight it can result in a fight to the death, either directly, or through injuries sustained in that fight.
As with all top line salutary predators they tend to avoid such conflicts and move on and into a territory that is vacant.
The founding father of evolutionary biology Nico Tinbergen once asked a very simple question in one of the books he wrote ?why are big scary animals rare?? The answer to that question is answered above. Food supply and size of the territory they need to support each animal. As a salutary top line predator, otters are never going to be that common anyway because of the laws of nature that prohibit it. In it?s simplest form ? A given area will only support a given number!?

Two further limiting factors on the numbers are unfortunately man made and those are the car, and endocrine disrupters.
Many animals are killed through having to cross main busy roads to access parts of their territory. Partly solvable by otter tunnels under roads it must be said, and the Highways Agency, all be slowly, is addressing this problem.
The latter (Endocrine disrupters) is somewhat harder to address, as otters get a double whammy from them. like us they live in an environment full of them and eat exclusively fish that accumulated them in their body tissues, which in turn bioaccumulate in their body and affects their reproductive ability through low sperm counts.

Otters as wonderful creatures and no right thinking anglers would like see them come to any harm. But where they are creating problems, practical workable solutions to protect the fish stocks must be found. And that as far as I and the SAA are concerned, does not include a cull or harming the creatures in anyway!

Ive not seen an otter since my grandad shut down his otter farm !
51 years ago

I've seen one (just one), about two or three years ago.

I must confess, if these fishery owners are not fencing their waters adequately in the first place is it any wonder that there is a problem with poachers ?

As I said, if they can blag a few dozen quid out of central government on the back of the Otter then good luck to them, every other bugger is on the gravy train of EU over-regulation, why shouldn't fisheries join them..............