-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
First Corvids then..... Raptors! (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Shadow-watcher
- Start date
MJB
Well-known member
You ain't seen nothing, yet! In today's Eastern Daily Press (5 March) is a story that several trout fishery owners are demanding a cull on otters. It will probably appear on the EDP website wwwEDP24.co.uk.news tomorrow or Monday. It's reasonably balanced reporting, mentioning 'artificially high concentrations of fish' and fish lakes being 'fast food joints' for otters.
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 at the moment' and goes on to say that 'they were having a knock-on effect on birds which feed on the fish': that will be the Cormorants and the Mergansers that they also want to cull, won't it?
Another owner is reported as saying 'are munching their way through lakes where people have put a lot of hard work and spent a lot of time to make pleasure spots for anglers'.
MJB
Irish Kite
Well-known member
:C
They now claim that they are "Saving Songbirds with Science"3
Its about time the likes of the RSPB,BTO,Wildlife Trust, WWF etc. mount a major campaign to blow this lot and their hidden agenda out of the water!!!!!!!!!
PS: The new thread I posted today highlights the threat from their toxic propoghanda that is already starting to seap through:C
Shadow-watcher;2079940[URL="http://www.songbird-survival.org.uk/index.html" said:
They now claim that they are "Saving Songbirds with Science"3
Its about time the likes of the RSPB,BTO,Wildlife Trust, WWF etc. mount a major campaign to blow this lot and their hidden agenda out of the water!!!!!!!!!
PS: The new thread I posted today highlights the threat from their toxic propoghanda that is already starting to seap through:C
Shadow-watcher
Well-known member
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.
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.
Last edited:
Irish Kite
Well-known member
Would some sort of "trap and release" programme work here??, under license of course. These trapped otters could then be used to repopulate areas that have little or no otters
Shadow-watcher
Well-known member
I wouldnt worry none of the people in this thread so far are the type to be become hysterical. I agree we do have a problem, but im not sure the reasons why fisheries are closing is fundamentally down to predation of stock by otters. Would the financial meltdown of recent years not have contributed? I could very well be wrong, as I know very little about fisheries, but having been a sheep farmer I am aware of what it means to farmers to loose animals to nature.
I think you have to accept natural predation, to resent it or react to it with 'them or me' attitude is testimony to the domineering perpsective on ecology that has lead to many serious environmental mistakes. Farmers are on the frontline in this respect, and we have to try to change traditional local practice into something more co-operative.
: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?
ChrisKten
It's true, I quite like Pigeons
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.
Shadow-watcher
Well-known member
Ditto!
Irish Kite
Well-known member
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?
Because they will most likely 'twist' the results to show that corvids and BOPs are killing all of the songbirds.
John B (not the sloop)
Don't blame me I didn't vote for 'em
Because it would be like trying to source research on evolutionary biology from a fundamentalist Christian 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.
Irish Kite
Well-known member
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?
John B (not the sloop)
Don't blame me I didn't vote for 'em
And I'll bet a bottle of Adnams Broadside that if the results indicate no measurable post cull effect on songbird populations (and the inevitable year after breeding season population "bounce" doesn't count) they'll get so deeply buried that it will take 20 archaeology students and a platoon of Royal Engineers two years of digging to find them. |8||
Shadow-watcher
Well-known member
Of course paying for research can have an effect on what results you get. Conflict of opinion is an regular issue for academics employed by organisations with an agenda. The accusation of should bias is credible when you deal with an organisation like SBS.
They are ignoring present scientific studies published by the BTO and Journal of Ornithology. They will ignore this one if/when it doesnt go in there favour. They can set the aim of the study, and can interperate its results as they see fit. They are also as far as I know under no obligation to make its findings public.
In a study of predation on prey numbers the results will always show a relationship, because predation is a natural ecological interaction. For songbirds the reasons we see consistant decline in populations is based in loss of habitat and loss of food resource. Ingnorance of invertebrate ecology, pesticides, and poor land management are contributing factors to the decline of birds. Woodland fragmentation and loss of woodland structre as well as all encompassing climatic changes are also important.
Predation in repeated studies has been shown to have no real effect on long term population abundance. These arent my opinions they are the results of numerous scientific studies carried out over many years.
Predation is never the cause of extinction, but rather the effector of it when populations are made vulnerable to it by a collection of other factors. The only cases of predation leading to extinction involve introduced species.
SBS are proving nothing by the study, but will use the erroneous results to justify disproportionate responses in the hope of getting a green light on raptor control to further increase the numbers of grouse their shooting interests can exploit. Their shared convictions toward dominating and controlling ecology to better increase relative revenues are an out of date an unethical approach to land management. None of the directors of SBS are scientists, or conservationists. There agenda is killing things not saving them.
Last edited:
Read throught the thread about CP Bells work (if you've got a spare day or two ;-)). http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=169572 I don't know whether he has links to Songbird Survival but he certainly has an agenda against conservation organisations. He's produced a paper arguing that sparrowhawks are reducing sparrow numbers and its been peer reviewed and published. The saying that you can prove anything with statistics is true to an extent and as Shadow watcher says there will always be a relationship between predator and prey numbers.
Similar threads
