The Predation Action Group and a Quiet Finish: Tony’s Specialist Scene

This is a dedicated thread for discussing article: The Predation Action Group and a Quiet Finish: Tony’s Specialist Scene

Some things never change.

This - http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-OQnZdUYV3no/UWqKN-HWdQI/AAAAAAAAHgA/38waHUKJL0A/s1600/wilton1.jpg - in a book - Andrews of Arcadia Scrapbook: The Wild Men of Wilton - that I bought from Medlar yesterday. Used to fish both the Kennet and the Wylye - Nadder - Ebble - Avon waters, you know. In my day, Preferred Predator of The Day was Pike - netted, speared, snared, shot, rod and lined, then buried with the toothy skulls nailed up on a fishing hut wall or tree...

Some things never change.

The anti-otter groups have made much of the "illegal release of captive bred otters" and the PAG appealed for information on their website over a year ago on this. I wrote to PAG a couple of months ago asking what evidence they had received - they didn't reply. I wrote again - still nothing, then I wrote directly to someone who I know is a member. he couldn't answer my question but referred me to someone who could. "No hard evidence but strong circumstantial" came the eventual reply - I guess that means none then.

Hysteria is being whipped up on the forums about otters but it's a facade - there's nothing behind it!

Eric Edwards said:

The anti-otter groups have made much of the "illegal release of captive bred otters" and the PAG appealed for information on their website over a year ago on this. I wrote to PAG a couple of months ago asking what evidence they had received - they didn't reply. I wrote again - still nothing, then I wrote directly to someone who I know is a member. he couldn't answer my question but referred me to someone who could. "No hard evidence but strong circumstantial" came the eventual reply - I guess that means none then.

Hysteria is being whipped up on the forums about otters but it's a facade - there's nothing behind it!

Click to expand...

Ah, so it's not just me that doesn't get replies.

From some of the related comments, it appears as though there may be some misconceptions regarding the PAG. The PAG is not an anti-otter group. It is most definately a pro fish/fishing group, set up with the intent to help preserve fish and fisheries.
The PAG board members is made up of a very small group of concerned individuals (including myself), who are worried about the impacts of increasing predation on fisheries and the sport of angling in Gt. Britain. The PAG is currently researching all of this and will be presenting/publishing the results at the appropriate time in the future.
The PAG is a totally independent body and it's board member's work is volunatry and unpaid. I'm sure that each of the board members already had very busy lives before adding on the extra time, effort and expense that being a PAG board member entails. With all of the usual life, work and family commitments, the huge amount of effort that the ongoing PAG research related work takes, unfortunately means that answering individual queries often has be pushed lower down the priority list as there simply isn't enough time for it all. Expecting the PAG board to detail their current research and findings to individuals, especially when the motive for such a request is unclear, isn't really something that we can realistically treat as a priority at the present time.
There is plenty of evidence out there related to the impact of otter related predation. The PAG website shows some quite horrific photos, and recent publications, such as the April issue of Carpworld and the May issue of Coarse Angling Today also have related articles and photos. Hugh Miles, the famous wildlife camaraman, details some very clear evidence witnessed in his own back garden in recent blogs on the subject. Also the very fact that miles and miles of protective fencing is being errected around fisheries up and down the country is clear evidence of the problem, as I don't know of any fishery owners that would go to the trouble and expense of such an excercise just for the fun of it.

No comments from me, but I've agreed with the sentiment, so no misconception on my part!

In my humble opinion, the group is an unnecessary dilution of anglings representation.

It does not represent anglers in general especially as it ignores anglers who seek out the detail.


"Expecting the PAG board to detail their current research and findings to individuals, especially when the motive for such a request is unclear, isn't really something that we can realistically treat as a priority at the present time."

Why not publicise that information to all then ?

Oh the august and peer reviewed journals of Carp World and Angling Today they should carry great weight with the government and their scientific advisors if and when you publish and present them with your report.

You state “PAG is not an anti-otter group. It is most definately a pro fish/fishing group, set up with the intent to help preserve fish and fisheries” That is spin and bull manure and you know it! The focus of what PAG publish is mainly on Otters and the first of any picture on PAG’s site is always on otters. The physiology of advertising and campaigning eh!

You then go on to highlight all the things otters have done on “some” fisheries. There is plenty of evidence out there related to the impact of otter related predation. The PAG website shows some quite horrific photos, and recent publications, such as the April issue of Carpworld and the May issue of Coarse Angling Today also have related articles and photos. Hugh Miles, the famous wildlife camaraman, details some very clear evidence witnessed in his own back garden in recent blogs on the subject. Also the very fact that miles and miles of protective fencing is being errected around fisheries up and down the country is clear evidence of the problem, as I don't know of any fishery owners that would go to the trouble and expense of such an excercise just for the fun of it.

But of course you are not an anti otter group are you?

Then there’s the board of PAG who were they elected by? And who do they really represent? It’s noteworthy that the Chair of the Angling Trust sits on it (personal capacity no doubt you and he will claim), but in his bio on PAG’s site where he list all the things he’s involved in, neglects to state that he is also the chair of Atr. Dare I suggest there might just be a perception that there’s a conflict of interest there and being economical with what he’s truly involved in?

You quote Hugh Mills, but neglect to point out that he made a short film (published on this site) where he highlights what he believes is the real threat to our river, cormorants! More economies of truth perhaps on PAG’s part?

The bottom line on otters is you and PAG know the subject splits angling right down the middle and PAG is only giving the anti side of otters. But of course it's not an anti otter group, it a pro fish and fishing group.
Now how does the saying go? You can fool some of the people some of the time……….

In my view the biggest threat to fishing is an anti otter stance such as PAG is taking and is likely to blow both feet off angling with the shotgun they are using.

The furore around Freddy the seal died pretty quickly but still for a while people got pretty upset at anglers wanting to harm a furry creature , multiply that one hundred fold if we stage an official anti otter campaign, besides what better indicator that a river is a healthy and its populations becoming self sustaining than the presence of this natural British predator, the PAGs effort is being spent on the wrong issue.

tonygibson1 said:

Expecting the PAG board to detail their current research and findings to individuals, especially when the motive for such a request is unclear, isn't really something that we can realistically treat as a priority at the present time.

Click to expand...

Hmm, so is it all secret then? Are we lowly people beneath these champions of the aquatic world? For information I've recently asked questions of senior people in the Angling Trust and the Environment Agency and found that I could get a polite and meaningful answer without any problem. Are PAG too busy to answer with all this charitable and unpaid work they do? For your information I do many many hours of charitable and unpaid work for angling organisations, as do a number of the respondants on this thread yet I can still find time to answer a question. If the motive for the request is unclear to me it doesn't bother me, because I have nothing to hide and i believe in what I do.

The PAG website, it's latest leaflet destribution, recent press releases and the related information outlined in my recent article and have repeated in the associated comment, all clearly state that the PAG has been formed out of concern for fish, fisheries and fishing and it's aim is to research and investigate the increasing predation issue and to publish the results at the appropriate time. Fact!

Some people may not agree with these aims, and that is personnal choice/opinion. I don't have a problem with that.
Some of the associated vitriolic and personal criticism I think is rather unnessary and sounds a little desperate to me. In the past I've found that similar tactics are employed by people that are loosing an argument.

While I agree with the aims of the PAG and I believe that the PAG has the best interests of angling's future at heart I am proud to be associated with the organisation.
Support for the PAG continues to grow. The support from the general angling puplic at the Carpin' On show this year was massive. At last year's show only one person out of hundreds that I spoke to disagreed with the way that the PAG were tackling the predation issue. This year ever single person I spoke to was in agreement!

With all due respect, people who attend the Carpin' On show are not representative of the general angling public. PAG's stated aim "to research and investigate the increasing predation issue and to publish the results at the appropriate time." is harmless enough, there's nothing there worth disagreeing with but what research is being done? What investigations are being carried out? When will the results be published and where, and who will get to see them?

The organisation has been in existence for a couple of years now and seemingly nothing is happening. The website hasn't been meaningfully updated for a long time and if we try to ask a question, we get ignored. My own concern was that there is a degree of misinformation which has been doing the rounds now for quite a while. There's a belief that illegal otter releases are taking place but no-one ever provides any evidence of this and I've come to the conclusion that it's all complete nonsense. PAG could help dispel this misinformation but chooses not to.

tonygibson1 said:

The PAG website, it's latest leaflet destribution, recent press releases and the related information outlined in my recent article and have repeated in the associated comment, all clearly state that the PAG has been formed out of concern for fish, fisheries and fishing and it's aim is to research and investigate the increasing predation issue and to publish the results at the appropriate time. Fact!

Some people may not agree with these aims, and that is personnal choice/opinion. I don't have a problem with that.
Some of the associated vitriolic and personal criticism I think is rather unnessary and sounds a little desperate to me. In the past I've found that similar tactics are employed by people that are loosing an argument.

While I agree with the aims of the PAG and I believe that the PAG has the best interests of angling's future at heart I am proud to be associated with the organisation.
Support for the PAG continues to grow. The support from the general angling puplic at the Carpin' On show this year was massive. At last year's show only one person out of hundreds that I spoke to disagreed with the way that the PAG were tackling the predation issue. This year ever single person I spoke to was in agreement!

Click to expand...

Well, for what it is worth, I for one would support the work being done by the PAG and am happy to wait to see the results of their work.

It is simple knowledge that we have an excess of predation, especially on our river down here in the South, Cormorants are bad enough but Otters are an apex predator who also kill for apparent fun; killing far more fish than they could possibly eat.

If we hope to have anything left in our rivers for our grandchildren to catch then research and appropriate actions needs to take place - and the sooner the better!

Peter Jacobs said:

Well, for what it is worth, I for one would support the work being done by the PAG and am happy to wait to see the results of their work.

It is simple knowledge that we have an excess of predation, especially on our river down here in the South, Cormorants are bad enough but Otters are an apex predator who also kill for apparent fun; killing far more fish than they could possibly eat.

If we hope to have anything left in our rivers for our grandchildren to catch then research and appropriate actions needs to take place - and the sooner the better!

Click to expand...

So Peter we have an apex predator that kills for fun but that has existed in the wild for thousands of years in Britain its amazing that any fish still exist in this country , unless of course the system was previously in balance and the water was clean.

This is a wild animal that naturally spaces itself out in an eco-system that fluctuates for a myriad number of reasons , any money would be far better spent on unbiased research.

When you call for appropriate research and then "appropriate action the sooner the better" , it means you have already made your mind up , so the research would be useless.

Its a usual forum technique to dismiss quoted research with "well they were paid to come up with those answers" I assume the same argument will not be allowed with the PAG findings.

Clean naturally flowing rivers which are in balance , including Pike , Perch , kingfishers and Otters are what we should be fighting for.

No, it is an animal that was previously virtually, if not actually, extinct as it couldn't handle the rigors of modern farming techniques.

It is only reintroduced because of 'man' playing at being God!

Not only were these people playing at being God but with absolutely no consultation with the wider angling community whatsoever.

That, in itself I think of as being an an act of environmental criminality - don't you?

The Bear and the Wolf were once natural inhabitants of these islands too, maybe we should consider reintroducing those back into our environment?

No, didn't think so!

What an incredibly narrow viewpoint.

Man "played god" as you put it by introducing hundreds of thousands of genetically manipulated carp into our aquatic ecosystems. Now, because they can't "handle the rigours" of a wild environment in which a totally natural and indigenous predator rules the roost you cry foul!

Otters were wiped out not by "techniques" but by poison, and thank goodness we've stopped using it.

Just 117 otters were reintroduced and the last one was in 1999. The animals have made a comeback on their own, but not by any natural means. The massive boom in otter numbers has come about because there is a plentiful supply of easy-to-catch food in the shape of creatures that were originally bred only for food and aren't native to anywhere.

Peter Jacobs said:

No, it is an animal that was previously virtually, if not actually, extinct as it couldn't handle the rigors of modern farming techniques.

It is only reintroduced because of 'man' playing at being God!

Not only were these people playing at being God but with absolutely no consultation with the wider angling community whatsoever.

That, in itself I think of as being an an act of environmental criminality - don't you?

The Bear and the Wolf were once natural inhabitants of these islands too, maybe we should consider reintroducing those back into our environment?

No, didn't think so!

Click to expand...

Peter you are normally such a sensible chap that posting this

extinct as it couldn't handle the rigors of modern farming techniques. leaves me amazed , do you mean it suffered a decline because of a massive build up of pollutants in the food chain , so any animal or plant unable to resist these should be discarded ? Is this an attitude common in those who work in the Petro Chemical Industry ? It seems a tremendously dated view.


So man should not play God in the natural world , I wouldn't call the assisted reintroduction of an animal that was common in Britain during my lifetime as playing God , its more the attempt to allow our natural heritage to flourish mainly by enabling clean water, thats hardly an act of eco criminality.

This is a wild animal that naturally spaces itself out in an eco-system that fluctuates for a myriad number of reasons , any money would be far better spent on unbiased research.

Click to expand...

On a trip to Wales at the tail end of the season I witnessed 7 otters in a very short stretch of a small Wye tributary. Is that the "naturally spaces itself out in an eco-system" that you speak of?

Nathan Walter said:

On a trip to Wales at the tail end of the season I witnessed 7 otters in a very short stretch of a small Wye tributary. Is that the "naturally spaces itself out in an eco-system" that you speak of?

Click to expand...

thing is anyone other than an angler would say that just shows otters are a conservation success and for them to be there in numbers shows there is an abundance of food and the catchment as never been healthier...very good PR for the EA/NE

so thats what you are up against even though at the start of PAG i did send them information regarding a river local to me.

to be honest i cant see the point of PAG, if you list the top 3 predation problems what can be done about them?

1. otters, nothing other than gain extra funding for fencing
2. cormorants, shoot more and that is already being pushed as much as possible by the angling trust
3. invasive crayfish, nothing a europe wide problem that until a miracle solution appears it will stay the same and they will spread across the UK

in all honesty i beleive that it is a carp led anti otter group and until they prove otherwise i reckon they do more harm than good by misinforming the average angler...thing is more important issues should be discussed and addressed.

Jason

jasonbean1 said:

thing is anyone other than an angler would say that just shows otters are a conservation success and for them to be there in numbers shows there is an abundance of food and the catchment as never been healthier...very good PR for the EA/NE

Click to expand...

Which is another example of democracy failing us. The opinions of 10,000 badly informed people shouldn't be compared with the opinions of a dozen very well informed people.
Predation is a problem on many waters. That is an inescapable fact. What are you going to do about it? Something or nothing?

jasonbean1 said:

in all honesty i beleive that it is a carp led anti otter group and until they prove otherwise i reckon they do more harm than good by misinforming the average angler...thing is more important issues should be discussed and addressed.

Click to expand...

Very inclined to feel the same, Jason. You and others will remember how my least utterance about otters ("Don't go there, fellas, WE will end up being culled - hated by our children and partners, routinely abused [even bricked] by passers-by at the waterside etc") was greeted on one Golden Wonder website, mostly not by the barbel anglers one would have expected to be present but carp fishers either new to barbel fishing (and to the site) or non-barbelly sorts just there for the otter debate ride, about how very personal and balls-out rude they became when they had been out-debated and had lost the argument. Very telling.