Perhaps the winning approach ?
[ame=http://youtu.be/w22I06c2dXs]Otters vs Cormorants - YouTube[/ame]
[ame=http://youtu.be/w22I06c2dXs]Otters vs Cormorants - YouTube[/ame]
Even when it is put forward in such a fashion people still doubt the evidence it is a shame that it has to be this way. Hugh Miles has seen and been involeved with more wildlife and the way nature works than anyone I can think of. I f he cannot convnce people who can. The siver fish stocks in my lake are that low that float fishermen are a rarety and the grebs have taken to catching and eating crayfish. The little grebs or Dab chicks have not been seen for at least 5years because they are that small they feed on fry and that is not in plentifull supply anymore.But the cormorants come on the water every day to see what they can find.
Do you mean me Tinker ? i am not doubting evidence but there is none in this film.
But i believe the film to true on the whole and I would wholly admit that , of course ,Hugh Miles has a much better informed opinion on this than I do , I simply expressed an opinion the 20'000 pounds of fish a day seems a massive amount , maybe thats how many fish are in our rivers after all ? i an just suprised by the numbers involved is all.
If you were better informed on the matter you would not need to ask the question Benny. I just do not understand why you need to question what the man has just told you. My club and many others have been trying to deal with the problem of cormorants for years . we have built fish hides bought bird scarers even pop-up inflatable men non of these measures work for any amount of time. They have ruined the general fishing on our lake. The carp anglers do not mind because there is that much more food for the carp to grt fat on . But the general fishing is rubbish thanks to the cormorants.
If you were better informed on the matter you would not need to ask the question Benny. I just do not understand why you need to question what the man has just told you. My club and many others have been trying to deal with the problem of cormorants for years . we have built fish hides bought bird scarers even pop-up inflatable men non of these measures work for any amount of time. They have ruined the general fishing on our lake. The carp anglers do not mind because there is that much more food for the carp to grt fat on . But the general fishing is rubbish thanks to the cormorants.
Exactly why shouldn't he be questioned?
Why don't you just share your knowledge/information and educate Benny?
When/how does a bird change its status from being a "foreign invader" to a seasonal migratory bird? Can they ever change their status?
The only question I am interested in is how and when we can get rid of them not the whys and wherefores of the evidence I am prepared to accept expert evidence at face value as it has always served me well in the past and I would rather not try to teach anybody anything unless they ask. Iwould rather deal with the problem than discuss it.
If you were better informed on the matter you would not need to ask the question Benny. I just do not understand why you need to question what the man has just told you. My club and many others have been trying to deal with the problem of cormorants for years . we have built fish hides bought bird scarers even pop-up inflatable men non of these measures work for any amount of time. They have ruined the general fishing on our lake. The carp anglers do not mind because there is that much more food for the carp to grt fat on . But the general fishing is rubbish thanks to the cormorants.
If you were better informed on the matter you would not need to ask the question Benny. I just do not understand why you need to question what the man has just told you. My club and many others have been trying to deal with the problem of cormorants for years . we have built fish hides bought bird scarers even pop-up inflatable men non of these measures work for any amount of time. They have ruined the general fishing on our lake. The carp anglers do not mind because there is that much more food for the carp to grt fat on . But the general fishing is rubbish thanks to the cormorants.
I've read Hugh's blog (I read it regularly.) but haven't watched the film yet. As others have underlined there are few people better qualified to pass comment on the subject.
I do find one aspect of all of the weight of protest against over predation of fish difficult to square though. I wonder if it is possible to open the point up to discussion from the position of Devil's advocate without becoming embroiled in a heated squabble? Oh well, hey-ho, I guess I'm going to anyway:
The clarion call from we anglers collectively seems to be the protest that none of the big hitting conservation groups, and the public generally, gives consideration to the place of fish in the grand scheme of things. There is little doubt that is true either. However what other wild creature that does receive that consideration is treated in the way we anglers wish to be free to treat fish? On the one hand we appear to be asking the public to make a distinction between cold blooded fish and other animals to the extent that we should be allowed to capture them for no other reason than recreation, yet on the other we are asking them to afford the same protective measures toward fish as birds, animals and plants receive.
Can we really expect non anglers to relate to a request which on the face of it ( I think) could be argued as being somewhat hypocritical? I will admit that my own feelings on the subject are ambivalent. as an angler I will gladly defend my right to fish to the death. As a wildlife lover I can see to some extent how others would see our philosophy as being skewed. After all, the obvious retort from those being lobbied would probably question how we can claim to care for fish whilst still wanting to fish for them. Yes we see ourselves as those oft mentioned 'guardians', but we could just as easily care for fish and their environments without trying to capture them with rod and line.
I think at the very least it is a viewpoint we need to have a counter-argument ready for
...heading for the shelter now.
---------- Post added at 15:18 ---------- Previous post was at 15:14 ----------
I'm puzzled by this response. are you expecting the general public to accept in blind faith the figures given? Surely there are going to be plenty of people questioning those figures other than we anglers? It seemed a perfectly reasonable question to me. And you have provided a reasonable answer.
Perhaps I'm misunderstanding something now?
What are you going to gain by arguing about it . Tell me that it is like nero fiddling while rome burns. Ido not believe in wasting time chewing the fat , listen to the people who know what they are taking about and get on with it.
You've completely missed the point of my post.
What are YOU going to do to contest it? It doesn't matter a jot what you believe in. What the public, or the conservation groups believe is what IS important. They are the people we have to convince of the need to protect fish alongside other flora and fauna. If we just ignore the obvious arguments we are going to face then we are selling our sport short. in fact it would be downright irresponsible.
We'll worry about it when we get there is the language of failure.