Pike Culls

T

Terry D

Guest
Whilst I have the utmost respect for what the PAC are doing and what they are trying to acheive, it sometimes is necessary to have a pike cull.

Following a study by a renowned fisheries expert on one of our small stillwaters, we found we had a big predation problem. There was an excessive number of pike and eels in the water which was preventing the other silver fish from thriving. We were advised to take some out, as these predators eat about 4-5 times their own weight in fish per year. We were also advised not to remove the large pike if we wanted a balaced, self-sustaining fishery. Hence we have a policy, like this other club concerned, of removing all pike under 10lbs in weight.

In the first year we removed approx 200lbs of eels and 200 pike. Since then, we have not removed any more eels and removed less than 6 pike per year over the last 3 years. Now our other fish are starting to progress, the pike are still there and breeding, and the fishery is coming good once again. So, yes it is necessary to cull pike - when the scientific facts demand it. We proved the pike were out of control on our water.
 
C

Chris Bishop

Guest
Pike maintain a natural balance, that's what the science says. otherwise how come they haven't eaten everything else centuries ago, leaving waters which only contain pike.
 
S

sash

Guest
"Following a study by a renowned fisheries expert" - well he obviously didn't have a clue what he was doing if he advised that eels should be removed.
 
T

Terry D

Guest
Sorry a slight mistake in my dit, we took out 1200lb of eels. This was with the EA's consent at the time. 1200lb of eels and approx 800lb of pike were scoffing approx 10000lbs of silver fish a year. On a 10 acre water this is difficult to support. I for one, and 12 others on our commitee are happy that we made the right choice for OUR FISHERY.
 
Mark Wintle

Mark Wintle

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 10, 2002
Messages
4,479
Reaction score
841
Location
Azide the Stour
I think the biggest problem is that there is no such thing as a balanced fishery. In other words the different species that are present, the proportions, ages, sizes etc. are dynamic and constantly changing. Different species dominate in turn, decline and others take over, over a period of years and decades.

Our problem is that selfishly we strive to maintain what is in our own narrow view some ideal that suits whoever has the most vested interest. (I'll understand that last statement myself in a minute). What Terry D describes is a situation that for whatever reason allowed the pike to do very well, perhaps too well. In time that balance would have changed (there would have been more larger pike), and the smaller fish would have thrived again as the number of smaller pike diminished.

When I get time I have it on my list of things to do to do a proper article on this dynamic fish balance (nearly a contradiction in terms) but my current writing workload precludes it.

I don't think it is a case of the PAC being right and Terry D being wrong or vice versa, but more a case of whose selfish interests need to be served!
 
W

Wolfman Woody

Guest
"Pike culls - the truth"

Seems like that document is exactly what Terry's club did. And rightly so.

We've had this discussion before, recently. People can get too hung up about their favourite species. That's one of the problems of being a single species angler.

You have to look at the bigger picture and pike can be a problem and pike can end up stunted. That doesn;t do the pike any good and it's detrimental to all the other stocks. The EA are there to advise and that's what they did.

Well done Terry.
 
Dave Smith

Dave Smith

Active member
Joined
Dec 1, 2003
Messages
44
Reaction score
0
Location
West Midlands
"removing all pike under 10lbs in weight

so you remove all male fish, leaving only females. Females die in due course, leaving no Pike.

now fishery has a problem with millions of 2oz Roach.

no Balance.

-----------------------

flip side is of course that given the opportunity I'll cull some Roach for livies.

But god help me If I thought of Culling, Barbel, Carp, Grayling........
 
M

Mark Hodson

Guest
Why can't people let nature have her way, she knows best.
 
T

Terry D

Guest
Nature may know best, but she doesn't tell you where to start when you stock a fishery from scratch. And as we found out, the balance went too far one way and was taking nature far too long to redress. She's a wonderful thing, but needs a helping hand now and again methinks.
 
W

Wolfman Woody

Guest
Nature is chaos.

Takes a long time to sort things out, like Terry says. Same happens in woodland too, you have to thin the little trees to allow some to grow nice and big.
 
F

Frank "Chubber" Curtis

Guest
"removing all pike under 10lbs in weight"
so you remove all male fish, leaving only females. Females die in due course, leaving no Pike.
now fishery has a problem with millions of 2oz Roach.
no Balance.

My thought exactly Dave. Whoever the "expert" was he didn't know a lot about the size differences of male and female pike.

Give it a few years Terry and you'll be restocking with small pike, males that is.
 
S

Steve Masterman

New member
Joined
Dec 13, 2004
Messages
0
Reaction score
0
"Self sustained fishery". How about this! The fishery was self sustained, Yes! maybe to the detriment of the silver fish in the short term. But as the biomass of the predators exceeds sustainable levels then the predators will have no choice but to become more cannibalistic.
As for a "self sustained fishery" you've just lost that! what you now have a "managed fishery".
The bottom line is that you DON'T have to, but you WANT to reduce predation. Why! because it suites you.
I really think waters should be fished on their merits be they good or bad. Mark is right nature "she does know best" and the sooner we realise we are her servants and not her master the world would be a better place.
 
P

Phil Heaton

Guest
Terry,
You said that the water was started from scratch, I find this hard to believe when you say that 1200lb of eels and 800lb of pike were removed as eels are amongst the slowest growing fish in our waters and pike will only thrive if there is sufficient prey fish for them. Also I have never heard of eels and pike being purposley stocked in a fishery, commercial fisheries usually rely on perch to maitain a healthy level of fry.
I would suggest that you and your commitee have actually taken over an existing water that already held pike, eels and silver fish and that the catches were not up to expectations.
 
M

matt

Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2004
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
The water is a fishery. The anglers didn't want to fish solely for pike and eels they wanted a healthy level of other species to fish for.
So to enable these species to thrive they culled the unwanted species.
As I said the water is a fishery not a nature reserve.
To many hands are thrown up in horror at actions that are perfectly legitimate in this instance.
 
P

Phil Hackett The common one :-(

Guest
Mark as usual you've nailed it ecologically!
 
T

Trisantona

New member
Joined
Jan 21, 2006
Messages
0
Reaction score
0
Phil,which Mark do you mean ? i can't agree with Mark Wintles first paragraph ,waters become known for different species and remains so .water X is a good tench water,Y may be a bream water and Z a pike water .
 
Mark Wintle

Mark Wintle

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 10, 2002
Messages
4,479
Reaction score
841
Location
Azide the Stour
"waters become known for different species and remains so .water X is a good tench water,Y may be a bream water and Z a pike water ."

That may be true in the short term; I've followed the changes to many waters over decades. Dominant species decline, waters change, new species are introduced, disease strikes, hot summers cause population explosions. Static? Remain so? Sorry, it is a dynamic process though not always a fast one. Anyone remember the changes wrought by columnaris and perch disease, the hot summers of 75/76, 63 winter.

Take for instance a water known as a "good bream" water. It holds a good number of 5 - 8lb fish. In 5 years time there cannot be a guarantee that those same fish are still around; either they will have grown bigger but fewer in number, or died out. Younger fish may be coming through, but never in exactly the same proportions. The water may still be well-suited to bream, but that won't be the case for ever.
 
T

Terry D

Guest
I say the water was started from scratch, but that was in about 1970. We have had ups and downs over the years and also I may add, some mismanagement of the water. It got to the stage where the fishing was very poor and so we sought expert advice from several sources. The actions taken now indicate healthy fish growth and for Frank, we still have eels, perch and chub so plenty of predators still in the water. Not to mention that carp are partial to fry as well. It was never intended for it to be a pike water, it's just that they thrived too well, to the detriment of the other species. As I said we have no regrets about what we've done to our water and we all think we've got a better fishery for it with better long term prospects. Who knows, give another 10 years and a bit more climate change...
 
A

Andy "the Dog" Nellist (SAA) (ACA)

Guest
The reason for most stockings and culls is to bring about short term change.

The problem is that in "managing" a water you often end up affecting it in ways that you did not anticipate.

I prefer to fish waters that are not managed. In such waters the fish behave naturally and there is invariably a good balance between predators and prey.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top