greencard1 wrote: ↑Mon Jul 27 2020 10:12 -Duncan Holmes wrote: ↑Mon Jul 27 2020 07:13 -Kev posted a while ago that Trent chub and barbel have a faster growth rate than chub and barbel on other rivers.greencard1 wrote: ↑Fri Jul 17 2020 21:08 -like it or not they are right and the science backs up their claim.Usually if you point out to a WT or RSPB member that there are a lot of cormorants in their area; their answer is 'There must be a lot of fish then'.
Whether its sustainable is another question, that unfortunately both sides will struggle to prove.
I believe that the reason for this is that the opposition for food has been eliminated by avian predators; i,e, smaller fish have been removed , and therefore the chub and barbel have more food to eat. This is illustrated by research done at Holme Pierrepont in the 1990s which is available to read on the internet.
So for a while, you can have a big cormorant presence, and still be catching good fish. But not for long.
My experiences.
Two sections of the same river, #1 has cormorants on #2 cormorants are controlled.
1 has well above average pike, barbel and chub, few dace and no roach at all, not one.
2 has roach to 3lbs, far less and smaller pike, but good numbers of barbel and chub but again they are smaller, it also has numberous shoals of dace.
On both sections there are resident otters.
.