Thanks Thanks:  7
Likes Likes:  48
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 35 of 35
  1. #31
    Join Date
    Feb 2016

    Default So you want a cull..

    So do I, but living in the real world it's not going to happen. Everyone's had the chance to kick the ball around the park, and we are pretty much all singing off the same hymn sheet.
    But who are we? Part of the hunting/shooting /fishing brigade who kill,maim and torture animals for their own pleasure.
    Our motives are totally selfish. We want to virtually wipe out a bird population to improve our own 'sport'.
    That's how the media would portray it. Anyone envisage much public support? It would be easier to to put the case for the opposition rather than the defence.
    The only realistic and possible solution is to get F.E.Bs on a general licence. That would give you freedom to hit them hard at the right time in prioritised areas.
    In Scotland, these are issued by S.N.H.
    Their starting position is this.....
    We need to be satisfied that :-
    a) There is a cause and effect link between predation and significant declines in the population or distribution of prey
    b) There is no satisfactory alternative to lethal control
    This means data, loads of it. S.N.H. hold all the cards as has already been said. The option to reject is so easy.
    Given the sum total of all the surveys and data we hold to date, even I would say 'You haven't got a case'. This means that surveys and monitoring will need to continue,collecting as much evidence as possible for a considerable time, in the meantime working with the only controls we have. How long?? Who knows??
    You can see the hurdles we have to get over. It could happen,how long can you wait?
    Last edited by tony considine; 10-02-2018 at 12:29 PM.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Near Kelso, Roxburghshire


    The FEBs (and seals) are of little or any commercial value to HMSG.....Fish farms are receiving an increasing amount of valid criticism: it is of some value for HMSG to have a bargaining point by (reluctantly) ceding some extra headroom to allow a significant reduction in FEBs in return for a bit more leeway on farming control. After all the salmon fishing new money spend in Scotland is very significant in job terms and annual income. The knock-on effect on Tweed alone if this river goes down the categories quickly is estimated at over £350 Million!!! That income nation wide is likely more than is spent by the farming industry on taxes.

    We now hear that HMSG is refusing to answer any embarrassing FIO requests! So there is little chance of finding out anything of value as to what they know and don't know, as to the true relationship twixt HMSG and the producers or what they know even about wild stock damage and prediction; until the ruling party goes down the tubes and Missy Cranky and her cohorts like Swinney take to the US lecture tour route that is!
    Last edited by castor; 10-02-2018 at 12:53 PM.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    In a cooling North Atlantic...

    Default Febs

    I don't see the old Lotka-Volterra pred-prey model getting usurped too soon. Certainly, there's a whole host of NGO's attaching cockamamie liberties via big funds quite resolulety determined to abolish sport.

    The solution is quite easy:

    * Reduce drastically gov-funded research

    * incentivise / enable independent research

    * admit that current politics isn't serving wild scottish salmon.

    Unfortunately, demonstrably, many of our current officiated folks are ideologically bent in pursuing ruin.
    Last edited by keirross; 11-02-2018 at 02:26 AM.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Mar 2008


    Was there years of studies, surveys and data to see the effect on rivers before they introduced Beavers to the Tay/Earn/ Isla system. Maybe someone from SNH could answer or produce
    such evidence

  5. #35

    Exclamation Not upturned shopping trolleys butÖ

    Quote Originally Posted by zorro View Post
    I might work as a short term measure to keep birds on the wing and prevent them feeding, but its not a solution long term. Every year there's more and more broods surviving to breed in their turn. The populations rising every year and so does the drain on juvenile fish. The only way to permanently reduce this drain is to reduce the number of adult breeding age birds, females first, until we gain a breathing space to let salmon recover. Scaring or using anything non lethal doesn't solve the problem, it just delays it by kicking the can down the river a wee bit, until there's so many birds they overrun the system.

    Maybe thereís another angle to this? Could we not make it that bit harder for FEBs to get at the small fish? Iíve watched pairs of them methodically ploating the pool margins in higher flows. Tethered gorse or hawthorn should provide decent cover. We tried some small scale stuff last spring. They acted like a magnet with clusters of fry gathering in amongst & just off the branches. We noted that most in the edges are still in place even after the winterís floods.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts