Shadow-watcher;2079940[URL="http://www.songbird-survival.org.uk/index.html" said:http://www.songbird-survival.org.uk/index.html[/URL]
In probably unintended irony, John Bailey, director of fisheries and conservation at 'Kingfisher Lakes and Apartments in Lyng', complains that ' there are too many otters in the county....
MJB
While I would be very against any culling of otters before everyone goes in off the deep end just bear in mind that there is a problem here. I know several of the fishery managers and most are trying to keep otters out of their lakes , but its not easy to fence around them when you have water flowing through the lakes and in times of high flow rubbish builds up on the fenced sluices. Otters are very playful animals and will kill easy quarry well beyond their needs. One guy I know was in tears last year when he found six 25-30lb carp killed and left on the bank with just a mouth full of flesh taken from each fish. It sounds unbelievable , but each fish is worth ten + thousands of pounds to the fishery in terms of buying the fish and lost revenue from fee paying anglers that would otherwise be attracted to the fishery. It should be remembered if the lake was not a fishery it would be filled in ( they are ex gravel pits ) so the fishery provides a valuable wildlife haven , but in the modern world someone has to pay for the lakes and grounds and that is the fishermen. The losses are now becoming so great that some fisheries are likely to close in the near future so what is to become of the home for many waterside birds ?
So clearly there is a problem, I do not think culling is the answer , but some way of discouraging the otters from visiting these rivers or perhaps its time to think about relocating surplus otters to other areas where they are still absent.
I should add here I am not a fisherman so have no axe to grind.
While I would be very against any culling of otters before everyone goes in off the deep end just bear in mind that there is a problem here.....
:C
They now claim that they are "Saving Songbirds with Science"3
So what is the problem with them doing the science - as far as I can tell no one else is doing it?
I could type an extremely long reply explaining what is wrong with Songbird Survival, but it's all been said before. Just search the forums for "Songbird Survival"; you'll get the general idea. |=)|
I will say that SBS are a small (just over 1000 members), extremely well funded, pressure group that are anti Raptor/Corvid; they have nothing to do with Conservation.
So what is the problem with them doing the science - as far as I can tell no one else is doing it?
Very nice posturing abut how much you hate them - but no answer as to why they shouldn't do the science if no one else is doing it? Surely doing the work to find out what the problem is is no bad thing? Who cares who pays for it as long as we get some answers? And if no other organisation wants to do the work why not this charity?
Surely doing the work to find out what the problem is is no bad thing? Who cares who pays for it as long as we get some answers? And if no other organisation wants to do the work why not this charity?
Very nice posturing abut how much you hate them - but no answer as to why they shouldn't do the science if no one else is doing it? Surely doing the work to find out what the problem is is no bad thing? Who cares who pays for it as long as we get some answers? And if no other organisation wants to do the work why not this charity?
Songbird Survival can do whatever they like as far as I am concerned, but as a charity they should be honest about their aims.
If they called themselves the Raptor Extermination Society, then fine, they would be entitled to their views, but under their current disguise, they are misleading people.
Because they will most likely 'twist' the results to show that corvids and BOPs are killing all of the songbirds.
But the research is being done by another organisation. Just because SBS pay for the work doesn't mean they have any say in the results. Then it has to be peer reviewed and they throw out anything which doesn't add up. So how can they twist the results. Their last research didn't get twisted by them?
But the research is being done by another organisation. Just because SBS pay for the work doesn't mean they have any say in the results. Then it has to be peer reviewed and they throw out anything which doesn't add up. So how can they twist the results. Their last research didn't get twisted by them?