OTTERS: IS IT TIME TO LET NATURE TAKES ITS COURSE?
What’s the point of restocking barbel if they don’t reproduce?
IHAVE strong opinions about the state of our rivers. While we can still catch lots of fish from them, I believe that is largely down to the fact they aren’t fished as much and the fish thrive on neglect. But I am concerned about predation, including otters.
My opinion about otters is the same as all predators: If they impact on someone’s livelihood that person should have the legal right to stop it happening.
To an extent, private stillwaters now have that possibility open, with fencing and removal of otters from within the fenced area in cooperation with the Wild Otter Trust.
My concern is what happens then because any otters removed have to be placed to the nearest point of capture outside that fence, usually to a river or stream. So the lakes are protected but rivers are exposed to predation.
The Barbel Society is concerned because it sees sport on several rivers declining due to otter predation. While that is true, any terminal decline is due to the original fish – in some cases the first stocking of barbel that river may have seen – failing to reproduce.
Should these rivers be restocked with barbel when the evidence is there to show that it is a situation that will need repeating regularly?
I have no issue with the Barbel Society stocking and maintaining its own fisheries, but should our cash be used to replace fish that are irreplaceable or should we allow nature to take its course and let those rivers return to former glories, often as fine roach and dace fisheries?
What I want is for as many anglers to enjoy fishing as much as possible and that sensible, middle ground needs to be found. What I don’t want angling to do is call for an otter cull.