Wild Justice?

If you're a huntsman or have a pet that you're proud of post about it in here
User avatar
Mike J
Ferox Trout
Ferox Trout
Posts: 11094
Joined: Wed Nov 09 2016 09:26
Location: Wessex

Re: Wild Justice?

Post by Mike J »

greencard1 wrote: Mon Jul 27 2020 10:12 -
Duncan Holmes wrote: Mon Jul 27 2020 07:13 -
greencard1 wrote: Fri Jul 17 2020 21:08 -
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'.
like it or not they are right and the science backs up their claim.

Whether its sustainable is another question, that unfortunately both sides will struggle to prove.
Kev posted a while ago that Trent chub and barbel have a faster growth rate than chub and barbel on other rivers.
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.

.
'No Man Ever Fishes The Same River Twice, .... For It Is Not The Same River, .... And He Is Not The Same Man' Heraclitus of Ephesus
Stewlaws
Barbel
Barbel
Posts: 2597
Joined: Thu Dec 28 2017 16:49

Re: Wild Justice?

Post by Stewlaws »

Mike J wrote: Wed Jul 29 2020 08:37 -
greencard1 wrote: Mon Jul 27 2020 10:12 -
Duncan Holmes wrote: Mon Jul 27 2020 07:13 -
greencard1 wrote: Fri Jul 17 2020 21:08 -
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'.
like it or not they are right and the science backs up their claim.

Whether its sustainable is another question, that unfortunately both sides will struggle to prove.
Kev posted a while ago that Trent chub and barbel have a faster growth rate than chub and barbel on other rivers.
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.

.
Difficult to quantify Mike without having data to hand I would think, knowing how variables can influence the ecology and my experience of those that overtly manage the environment against those that covert manage ... It's a diverse pitch we play on with extremes, speaking with someone who had 30 plus years experience on foxing on commercial shoots he learnt more on fox behaviour using thermal imaging in a 12 month period than the previous 30+.
I believe our biggest mistake is going on anecdotal reports/evidence..... I've been guilty on that basis, everything I read or heard from an older generation was gospel in my eyes, nowadays I find scientific based reading more reliable in piecing together the facts, although this is usually game based not riparian.

Was down at Stockbridge looking at the Houghton stretch .... Just screaming quality,but found myself wondering if their management has changed much over the years, I'm sure it has.
User avatar
Mike J
Ferox Trout
Ferox Trout
Posts: 11094
Joined: Wed Nov 09 2016 09:26
Location: Wessex

Re: Wild Justice?

Post by Mike J »

Stewlaws wrote: Thu Jul 30 2020 09:15 -
Mike J wrote: Wed Jul 29 2020 08:37 -
greencard1 wrote: Mon Jul 27 2020 10:12 -
Duncan Holmes wrote: Mon Jul 27 2020 07:13 -
greencard1 wrote: Fri Jul 17 2020 21:08 -
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'.
like it or not they are right and the science backs up their claim.

Whether its sustainable is another question, that unfortunately both sides will struggle to prove.
Kev posted a while ago that Trent chub and barbel have a faster growth rate than chub and barbel on other rivers.
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.

.
Difficult to quantify Mike without having data to hand I would think, knowing how variables can influence the ecology and my experience of those that overtly manage the environment against those that covert manage ... It's a diverse pitch we play on with extremes, speaking with someone who had 30 plus years experience on foxing on commercial shoots he learnt more on fox behaviour using thermal imaging in a 12 month period than the previous 30+.
I believe our biggest mistake is going on anecdotal reports/evidence..... I've been guilty on that basis, everything I read or heard from an older generation was gospel in my eyes, nowadays I find scientific based reading more reliable in piecing together the facts, although this is usually game based not riparian.

Was down at Stockbridge looking at the Houghton stretch .... Just screaming quality,but found myself wondering if their management has changed much over the years, I'm sure it has.

Hi Stew, the two sections of river I mentioned have been in continuous management by two respective keepers who's time on the banks totals over 50years, it was likewise with their respective predecessors.
Your visit to the Houghton water is a similar example, where until recently, three generations of the Lunn family * had keepered the water since 1887.

The problem with any management of our countryside is that the subject was never studied in great detial until the Nature Conservancy Council was established in 1949. Even today very few areas have baseline studies and that sadly includes many of our SSSI's and this lack means the effects of various forms of management cannot be accurately correlated.
It has been my experience that individuals with a long association with a particular area or subject can be of exceptional value when assessing its potential and determining long term management objectives.

* "Years ago the Test was always crystal-clear. When I was a boy at school in Andover, it was a little market town. Now it's almost the size of a city and its waste water is finding its way into the river. They are still building more houses, though, and I have no idea where the water is going to come from to feed its domestic and commercial plumbing demands. Also, the weed in the river is not so prolific, particularly ranunculus, which acts as a filter and cleans up the river. " Mick Lunn Headkeeper to the Houghton Club 1963-1992

.
'No Man Ever Fishes The Same River Twice, .... For It Is Not The Same River, .... And He Is Not The Same Man' Heraclitus of Ephesus
User avatar
davelumb
Forum Sponsor
Forum Sponsor
Posts: 42342
Joined: Sat Aug 27 2011 05:00
Location: On some faraway beach
Contact:

Re: Wild Justice?

Post by davelumb »

As an example of WJ's mentality this is what Mark Avery thinks about Country File.

"We know that Countryfile has form in leaning towards the opinions, however ungrounded in facts, of farmers and shooters and we all have to take that as read."

https://wildjustice.org.uk/general/countryfile/
Stewlaws
Barbel
Barbel
Posts: 2597
Joined: Thu Dec 28 2017 16:49

Re: Wild Justice?

Post by Stewlaws »

Mike J wrote: Fri Jul 31 2020 07:15 -
Stewlaws wrote: Thu Jul 30 2020 09:15 -
Mike J wrote: Wed Jul 29 2020 08:37 -
greencard1 wrote: Mon Jul 27 2020 10:12 -
Duncan Holmes wrote: Mon Jul 27 2020 07:13 -
greencard1 wrote: Fri Jul 17 2020 21:08 -
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'.
like it or not they are right and the science backs up their claim.

Whether its sustainable is another question, that unfortunately both sides will struggle to prove.
Kev posted a while ago that Trent chub and barbel have a faster growth rate than chub and barbel on other rivers.
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.

.
Difficult to quantify Mike without having data to hand I would think, knowing how variables can influence the ecology and my experience of those that overtly manage the environment against those that covert manage ... It's a diverse pitch we play on with extremes, speaking with someone who had 30 plus years experience on foxing on commercial shoots he learnt more on fox behaviour using thermal imaging in a 12 month period than the previous 30+.
I believe our biggest mistake is going on anecdotal reports/evidence..... I've been guilty on that basis, everything I read or heard from an older generation was gospel in my eyes, nowadays I find scientific based reading more reliable in piecing together the facts, although this is usually game based not riparian.

Was down at Stockbridge looking at the Houghton stretch .... Just screaming quality,but found myself wondering if their management has changed much over the years, I'm sure it has.

Hi Stew, the two sections of river I mentioned have been in continuous management by two respective keepers who's time on the banks totals over 50years, it was likewise with their respective predecessors.
Your visit to the Houghton water is a similar example, where until recently, three generations of the Lunn family * had keepered the water since 1887.

The problem with any management of our countryside is that the subject was never studied in great detial until the Nature Conservancy Council was established in 1949. Even today very few areas have baseline studies and that sadly includes many of our SSSI's and this lack means the effects of various forms of management cannot be accurately correlated.
It has been my experience that individuals with a long association with a particular area or subject can be of exceptional value when assessing its potential and determining long term management objectives.

* "Years ago the Test was always crystal-clear. When I was a boy at school in Andover, it was a little market town. Now it's almost the size of a city and its waste water is finding its way into the river. They are still building more houses, though, and I have no idea where the water is going to come from to feed its domestic and commercial plumbing demands. Also, the weed in the river is not so prolific, particularly ranunculus, which acts as a filter and cleans up the river. " Mick Lunn Headkeeper to the Houghton Club 1963-1992

.
Hi Mike,

Without being a dramatist,the fact that the older generation when recounting their experiences are now discussing a by-gone era, which sounded golden, in reality at the young age of 52 myself, I've seen huge changes in diversity amongst certain species that my children won't see in numbers, the progression of the human population seems destined to serve only to drive numbers down evermore, I watched an episode of Jack Charlton last night goose flighting on the firth ... then with the late great Archie Coats on the pigeons, one species that has done well in population oddly! Anyone with time to sit with a gun rod or camera will appreciate those moments ... but for the vast they will never understand what diversity ever meant in nature.

Did you extract the words of Lunn from a book? Curious.
greencard1
Perch
Perch
Posts: 850
Joined: Mon Feb 03 2020 05:30

Re: Wild Justice?

Post by greencard1 »

davelumb wrote: Fri Jul 31 2020 08:25 -
As an example of WJ's mentality this is what Mark Avery thinks about Country File.

"We know that Countryfile has form in leaning towards the opinions, however ungrounded in facts, of farmers and shooters and we all have to take that as read."

https://wildjustice.org.uk/general/countryfile/
Farmers and anglers are portrayed in a similar way on mainstream media; mostly as buffoons. Most farming or large animal vet programmes are accompanied by stupid pizzicato music suggesting a comedic subject. The last successful angling programme was a couple of clowns (Whitehouse and Mortimer, both very good clowns) doing something that most of the general public sees as stupid (fishing). But at least it put fishing back on the BBC.
If Countryfile supports farmers, then good for them.
However, Countryfile is definitely not the angler's friend. I am referring to the programme that came from Calverton fish farm. It was a blatant demonstration of misinformation. It showed some young barbel being put into a growing-on pond with a current flowing through it to get them used to flowing water. Matt Baker explained that the barbel have to get used to predators "such as heron and kingfisher". The barbel were already twice as big as kingfisher, and the pond was deep with sheer sides, so not accessible to heron. No mention was made throughout the whole programme of the orange string that criss-crossed every pond on site, or what it was there to prevent, (cormorants).

Another Countryfile programme tackled the subject of otters killing carp at fisheries, and how it is possible to trap and remove them. There was a lot of footage of cormorants swallowing fish in this piece about otters (?); but the word "cormorant" was never used.

In another prime time BBC Sunday night programme, Countryfile's Ellie Harrison presented a one hour programme called 'England's Rivers'. There was not a cormorant in sight anywhere; just as if they did not exist. Every problem associated with England's rivers was attributed to mink. Especially falling kingfisher numbers.

I read a blog a while ago by Hugh Miles in which he said something like..'I have been filming with Ellie Harrison; I talked a lot about problems caused by otters; I hope the comments make it to the final cut'. They didn't.

As long as the BBC present anglers as buffoons and continue peddling misinformation, we will make no headway. Projects such as the clear water status disaster about to unfold on the Broads will go unchallenged, and angling will continue to decline. And Mark Avery and co. will have the last laugh.

(sorry if I have repeated myself here)
Last edited by greencard1 on Sun Aug 16 2020 05:27, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Duncan Holmes
Barbel
Barbel
Posts: 4946
Joined: Mon Feb 20 2012 06:00
Location: In the heart of Norfolk
Contact:

Re: Wild Justice?

Post by Duncan Holmes »

greencard1 wrote: Sat Aug 01 2020 09:00 -
davelumb wrote: Fri Jul 31 2020 08:25 -
As an example of WJ's mentality this is what Mark Avery thinks about Country File.

"We know that Countryfile has form in leaning towards the opinions, however ungrounded in facts, of farmers and shooters and we all have to take that as read."

https://wildjustice.org.uk/general/countryfile/
Farmers and anglers are portrayed in a similar way on mainstream media; mostly as buffoons. Most farming or large animal vet programmes are accompanied by stupid pizzicato music suggesting a comedic subject. The last successful angling programme was a couple of clowns (Whitehouse and Mortimer, both very good clowns) doing something that most of the general public sees as stupid (fishing). But at least it put fishing back on the BBC.
If Countryfile supports farmers, then good for them.
However, Countryfile is definitely not the angler's friend. I am referring to the programme that came from Calverton fish farm. It was a blatant demonstration of misinformation. It showed some young barbel being put into a growing-on pond with a current flowing through it to get them used to flowing water. Matt Baker explained that the barbel have to get used to predators "such as heron and kingfisher". The barbel were already twice as big as kingfisher, and the pond was deep with sheer sides, so not accessible to heron. No mention was made throughout the whole programme of the orange string that criss-crossed every pond on site, or what it was there to prevent, (cormorants).

Another Countryfile programme tackled the subject of otters killing carp at fisheries, and how it is possible to trap and remove them. There was a lot of footage of cormorants swallowing fish in this piece about otters (?); but the word "cormorant" was never used.

In another prime time BBC Sunday night programme, Countryfile's Ellie Harrison presented a one hour programme called 'England's Rivers'. There was not a cormorant in sight anywhere; just as if they did not exist. Every problem associated with England's rivers was attributed to mink. Especially falling kingfisher numbers.

I read a blog a while ago by Hugh Miles in which he said something like..'I have been filming with Ellie Harrison; I talked a lot about problems caused by otters; I hope the comments make it to the final cut'. They didn't.

As long as the BBC present anglers as buffoons and continue peddling misinformation, we will make no headway. Projects such as the clear water status disaster about to unfold on the Broads will go unchallenged, and angling will continue to decline. And Mark Avery and co. will have the last laugh.

(sorry if I have repeated myself here)
"Projects such as the clear water status disaster about to unfold on the Broads will go unchallenged"

It certainly isn't going unchallenged and that will continue.

Watch this space :wink:
"The opinions expressed in any of my posts are my own and do not reflect the view of the any organisation that I may be associated with."
User avatar
Mike J
Ferox Trout
Ferox Trout
Posts: 11094
Joined: Wed Nov 09 2016 09:26
Location: Wessex

Re: Wild Justice?

Post by Mike J »

Stewlaws wrote: Fri Jul 31 2020 10:59 -
Mike J wrote: Fri Jul 31 2020 07:15 -
Stewlaws wrote: Thu Jul 30 2020 09:15 -
Mike J wrote: Wed Jul 29 2020 08:37 -
greencard1 wrote: Mon Jul 27 2020 10:12 -
Duncan Holmes wrote: Mon Jul 27 2020 07:13 -
greencard1 wrote: Fri Jul 17 2020 21:08 -
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'.
like it or not they are right and the science backs up their claim.

Whether its sustainable is another question, that unfortunately both sides will struggle to prove.
Kev posted a while ago that Trent chub and barbel have a faster growth rate than chub and barbel on other rivers.
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.

.
Difficult to quantify Mike without having data to hand I would think, knowing how variables can influence the ecology and my experience of those that overtly manage the environment against those that covert manage ... It's a diverse pitch we play on with extremes, speaking with someone who had 30 plus years experience on foxing on commercial shoots he learnt more on fox behaviour using thermal imaging in a 12 month period than the previous 30+.
I believe our biggest mistake is going on anecdotal reports/evidence..... I've been guilty on that basis, everything I read or heard from an older generation was gospel in my eyes, nowadays I find scientific based reading more reliable in piecing together the facts, although this is usually game based not riparian.

Was down at Stockbridge looking at the Houghton stretch .... Just screaming quality,but found myself wondering if their management has changed much over the years, I'm sure it has.

Hi Stew, the two sections of river I mentioned have been in continuous management by two respective keepers who's time on the banks totals over 50years, it was likewise with their respective predecessors.
Your visit to the Houghton water is a similar example, where until recently, three generations of the Lunn family * had keepered the water since 1887.

The problem with any management of our countryside is that the subject was never studied in great detial until the Nature Conservancy Council was established in 1949. Even today very few areas have baseline studies and that sadly includes many of our SSSI's and this lack means the effects of various forms of management cannot be accurately correlated.
It has been my experience that individuals with a long association with a particular area or subject can be of exceptional value when assessing its potential and determining long term management objectives.

* "Years ago the Test was always crystal-clear. When I was a boy at school in Andover, it was a little market town. Now it's almost the size of a city and its waste water is finding its way into the river. They are still building more houses, though, and I have no idea where the water is going to come from to feed its domestic and commercial plumbing demands. Also, the weed in the river is not so prolific, particularly ranunculus, which acts as a filter and cleans up the river. " Mick Lunn Headkeeper to the Houghton Club 1963-1992

.
Hi Mike,

Without being a dramatist,the fact that the older generation when recounting their experiences are now discussing a by-gone era, which sounded golden, in reality at the young age of 52 myself, I've seen huge changes in diversity amongst certain species that my children won't see in numbers, the progression of the human population seems destined to serve only to drive numbers down evermore, I watched an episode of Jack Charlton last night goose flighting on the firth ... then with the late great Archie Coats on the pigeons, one species that has done well in population oddly! Anyone with time to sit with a gun rod or camera will appreciate those moments ... but for the vast they will never understand what diversity ever meant in nature.

Did you extract the words of Lunn from a book? Curious.

Hi Stew,

Mick Lunn's quote is from his memoir 'A Particular Lunn: A Hundred Glorious Years on the Test' in my library, a book I can highly recommend.
Mick Lunn along with Frank Sawyer are the only two river keepers who have been afforded a Telegraph obituary, I was privileged to meet the latter but sadly never the former.
I have fished the Test in several places and as you say it looks almost unreal that a river could ever be so perfect. I know of 7+Chub and 30+Pike and would happiely give a chunk of my pension for week to coarse fish it, sadly all the best water is closed through the winter to protect the banks.

Major Archie Coats, now there is a name from the golden era of pigeon shooting, and someone I have also met, when he gave us a talk on my keepers course at Fordingbridge. He described rolling a wet wine bottle in wood ash and decoying pigeons down to it, something I tried, unsuccessfully.

The one thing we do know is that nature can adapt to change and just because a species ceases to exist in one area is doesn't mean it is not thriving somewhere else.
The lack of a baseline means we never know what was actually present before we arrived and began our 'management'. Oddly enough if it wasn't for the Victorians and their collections (dare I say trophies) we wouldn't have much idea at all! Strange old world is it not?

.
'No Man Ever Fishes The Same River Twice, .... For It Is Not The Same River, .... And He Is Not The Same Man' Heraclitus of Ephesus
Stewlaws
Barbel
Barbel
Posts: 2597
Joined: Thu Dec 28 2017 16:49

Re: Wild Justice?

Post by Stewlaws »

Mike J wrote: Sat Aug 01 2020 09:39 -
Stewlaws wrote: Fri Jul 31 2020 10:59 -
Mike J wrote: Fri Jul 31 2020 07:15 -
Stewlaws wrote: Thu Jul 30 2020 09:15 -
Mike J wrote: Wed Jul 29 2020 08:37 -
greencard1 wrote: Mon Jul 27 2020 10:12 -
Duncan Holmes wrote: Mon Jul 27 2020 07:13 -
greencard1 wrote: Fri Jul 17 2020 21:08 -
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'.
like it or not they are right and the science backs up their claim.

Whether its sustainable is another question, that unfortunately both sides will struggle to prove.
Kev posted a while ago that Trent chub and barbel have a faster growth rate than chub and barbel on other rivers.
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.

.
Difficult to quantify Mike without having data to hand I would think, knowing how variables can influence the ecology and my experience of those that overtly manage the environment against those that covert manage ... It's a diverse pitch we play on with extremes, speaking with someone who had 30 plus years experience on foxing on commercial shoots he learnt more on fox behaviour using thermal imaging in a 12 month period than the previous 30+.
I believe our biggest mistake is going on anecdotal reports/evidence..... I've been guilty on that basis, everything I read or heard from an older generation was gospel in my eyes, nowadays I find scientific based reading more reliable in piecing together the facts, although this is usually game based not riparian.

Was down at Stockbridge looking at the Houghton stretch .... Just screaming quality,but found myself wondering if their management has changed much over the years, I'm sure it has.

Hi Stew, the two sections of river I mentioned have been in continuous management by two respective keepers who's time on the banks totals over 50years, it was likewise with their respective predecessors.
Your visit to the Houghton water is a similar example, where until recently, three generations of the Lunn family * had keepered the water since 1887.

The problem with any management of our countryside is that the subject was never studied in great detial until the Nature Conservancy Council was established in 1949. Even today very few areas have baseline studies and that sadly includes many of our SSSI's and this lack means the effects of various forms of management cannot be accurately correlated.
It has been my experience that individuals with a long association with a particular area or subject can be of exceptional value when assessing its potential and determining long term management objectives.

* "Years ago the Test was always crystal-clear. When I was a boy at school in Andover, it was a little market town. Now it's almost the size of a city and its waste water is finding its way into the river. They are still building more houses, though, and I have no idea where the water is going to come from to feed its domestic and commercial plumbing demands. Also, the weed in the river is not so prolific, particularly ranunculus, which acts as a filter and cleans up the river. " Mick Lunn Headkeeper to the Houghton Club 1963-1992

.
Hi Mike,

Without being a dramatist,the fact that the older generation when recounting their experiences are now discussing a by-gone era, which sounded golden, in reality at the young age of 52 myself, I've seen huge changes in diversity amongst certain species that my children won't see in numbers, the progression of the human population seems destined to serve only to drive numbers down evermore, I watched an episode of Jack Charlton last night goose flighting on the firth ... then with the late great Archie Coats on the pigeons, one species that has done well in population oddly! Anyone with time to sit with a gun rod or camera will appreciate those moments ... but for the vast they will never understand what diversity ever meant in nature.

Did you extract the words of Lunn from a book? Curious.

Hi Stew,

Mick Lunn's quote is from his memoir 'A Particular Lunn: A Hundred Glorious Years on the Test' in my library, a book I can highly recommend.
Mick Lunn along with Frank Sawyer are the only two river keepers who have been afforded a Telegraph obituary, I was privileged to meet the latter but sadly never the former.
I have fished the Test in several places and as you say it looks almost unreal that a river could ever be so perfect. I know of 7+Chub and 30+Pike and would happiely give a chunk of my pension for week to coarse fish it, sadly all the best water is closed through the winter to protect the banks.

Major Archie Coats, now there is a name from the golden era of pigeon shooting, and someone I have also met, when he gave us a talk on my keepers course at Fordingbridge. He described rolling a wet wine bottle in wood ash and decoying pigeons down to it, something I tried, unsuccessfully.

The one thing we do know is that nature can adapt to change and just because a species ceases to exist in one area is doesn't mean it is not thriving somewhere else.
The lack of a baseline means we never know what was actually present before we arrived and began our 'management'. Oddly enough if it wasn't for the Victorians and their collections (dare I say trophies) we wouldn't have much idea at all! Strange old world is it not?

.
Thanks Mike, just gone on line and picked up a used copy, will enjoy reading this from a river keepers perspective.👌
greencard1
Perch
Perch
Posts: 850
Joined: Mon Feb 03 2020 05:30

Re: Wild Justice?

Post by greencard1 »

Duncan Holmes wrote: Sat Aug 01 2020 09:24 -
greencard1 wrote: Sat Aug 01 2020 09:00 -
davelumb wrote: Fri Jul 31 2020 08:25 -
As an example of WJ's mentality this is what Mark Avery thinks about Country File.

"We know that Countryfile has form in leaning towards the opinions, however ungrounded in facts, of farmers and shooters and we all have to take that as read."

https://wildjustice.org.uk/general/countryfile/
Farmers and anglers are portrayed in a similar way on mainstream media; mostly as buffoons. Most farming or large animal vet programmes are accompanied by stupid pizzicato music suggesting a comedic subject. The last successful angling programme was a couple of clowns (Whitehouse and Mortimer, both very good clowns) doing something that most of the general public sees as stupid (fishing). But at least it put fishing back on the BBC.
If Countryfile supports farmers, then good for them.
However, Countryfile is definitely not the angler's friend. I am referring to the programme that came from Calverton fish farm. It was a blatant demonstration of misinformation. It showed some young barbel being put into a growing-on pond with a current flowing through it to get them used to flowing water. Matt Baker explained that the barbel have to get used to predators "such as heron and kingfisher". The barbel were already twice as big as kingfisher, and the pond was deep with sheer sides, so not accessible to heron. No mention was made throughout the whole programme of the orange string that criss-crossed every pond on site, or what it was there to prevent, (cormorants).

Another Countryfile programme tackled the subject of otters killing carp at fisheries, and how it is possible to trap and remove them. There was a lot of footage of cormorants swallowing fish in this piece about otters (?); but the word "cormorant" was never used.

In another prime time BBC Sunday night programme, Countryfile's Ellie Harrison presented a one hour programme called 'England's Rivers'. There was not a cormorant in sight anywhere; just as if they did not exist. Every problem associated with England's rivers was attributed to mink. Especially falling kingfisher numbers.

I read a blog a while ago by Hugh Miles in which he said something like..'I have been filming with Ellie Harrison; I talked a lot about problems caused by otters; I hope the comments make it to the final cut'. They didn't.

As long as the BBC present anglers as buffoons and continue peddling misinformation, we will make no headway. Projects such as the clear water status disaster about to unfold on the Broads will go unchallenged, and angling will continue to decline. And Mark Avery and co. will have the last laugh.

(sorry if I have repeated myself here)
"Projects such as the clear water status disaster about to unfold on the Broads will go unchallenged"

It certainly isn't going unchallenged and that will continue.

Watch this space :wink:
Sorry Duncan; I meant unchallenged by the general public because they will not even know about it.
Well done to you and everyone fighting the scheme.
User avatar
Mike J
Ferox Trout
Ferox Trout
Posts: 11094
Joined: Wed Nov 09 2016 09:26
Location: Wessex

Re: Wild Justice?

Post by Mike J »

Stewlaws wrote: Sat Aug 01 2020 10:23 -
Mike J wrote: Sat Aug 01 2020 09:39 -
Stewlaws wrote: Fri Jul 31 2020 10:59 -
Mike J wrote: Fri Jul 31 2020 07:15 -
Stewlaws wrote: Thu Jul 30 2020 09:15 -
Mike J wrote: Wed Jul 29 2020 08:37 -
greencard1 wrote: Mon Jul 27 2020 10:12 -
Duncan Holmes wrote: Mon Jul 27 2020 07:13 -
greencard1 wrote: Fri Jul 17 2020 21:08 -
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'.
like it or not they are right and the science backs up their claim.

Whether its sustainable is another question, that unfortunately both sides will struggle to prove.
Kev posted a while ago that Trent chub and barbel have a faster growth rate than chub and barbel on other rivers.
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.

.
Difficult to quantify Mike without having data to hand I would think, knowing how variables can influence the ecology and my experience of those that overtly manage the environment against those that covert manage ... It's a diverse pitch we play on with extremes, speaking with someone who had 30 plus years experience on foxing on commercial shoots he learnt more on fox behaviour using thermal imaging in a 12 month period than the previous 30+.
I believe our biggest mistake is going on anecdotal reports/evidence..... I've been guilty on that basis, everything I read or heard from an older generation was gospel in my eyes, nowadays I find scientific based reading more reliable in piecing together the facts, although this is usually game based not riparian.

Was down at Stockbridge looking at the Houghton stretch .... Just screaming quality,but found myself wondering if their management has changed much over the years, I'm sure it has.

Hi Stew, the two sections of river I mentioned have been in continuous management by two respective keepers who's time on the banks totals over 50years, it was likewise with their respective predecessors.
Your visit to the Houghton water is a similar example, where until recently, three generations of the Lunn family * had keepered the water since 1887.

The problem with any management of our countryside is that the subject was never studied in great detial until the Nature Conservancy Council was established in 1949. Even today very few areas have baseline studies and that sadly includes many of our SSSI's and this lack means the effects of various forms of management cannot be accurately correlated.
It has been my experience that individuals with a long association with a particular area or subject can be of exceptional value when assessing its potential and determining long term management objectives.

* "Years ago the Test was always crystal-clear. When I was a boy at school in Andover, it was a little market town. Now it's almost the size of a city and its waste water is finding its way into the river. They are still building more houses, though, and I have no idea where the water is going to come from to feed its domestic and commercial plumbing demands. Also, the weed in the river is not so prolific, particularly ranunculus, which acts as a filter and cleans up the river. " Mick Lunn Headkeeper to the Houghton Club 1963-1992

.
Hi Mike,

Without being a dramatist,the fact that the older generation when recounting their experiences are now discussing a by-gone era, which sounded golden, in reality at the young age of 52 myself, I've seen huge changes in diversity amongst certain species that my children won't see in numbers, the progression of the human population seems destined to serve only to drive numbers down evermore, I watched an episode of Jack Charlton last night goose flighting on the firth ... then with the late great Archie Coats on the pigeons, one species that has done well in population oddly! Anyone with time to sit with a gun rod or camera will appreciate those moments ... but for the vast they will never understand what diversity ever meant in nature.

Did you extract the words of Lunn from a book? Curious.

Hi Stew,

Mick Lunn's quote is from his memoir 'A Particular Lunn: A Hundred Glorious Years on the Test' in my library, a book I can highly recommend.
Mick Lunn along with Frank Sawyer are the only two river keepers who have been afforded a Telegraph obituary, I was privileged to meet the latter but sadly never the former.
I have fished the Test in several places and as you say it looks almost unreal that a river could ever be so perfect. I know of 7+Chub and 30+Pike and would happiely give a chunk of my pension for week to coarse fish it, sadly all the best water is closed through the winter to protect the banks.

Major Archie Coats, now there is a name from the golden era of pigeon shooting, and someone I have also met, when he gave us a talk on my keepers course at Fordingbridge. He described rolling a wet wine bottle in wood ash and decoying pigeons down to it, something I tried, unsuccessfully.

The one thing we do know is that nature can adapt to change and just because a species ceases to exist in one area is doesn't mean it is not thriving somewhere else.
The lack of a baseline means we never know what was actually present before we arrived and began our 'management'. Oddly enough if it wasn't for the Victorians and their collections (dare I say trophies) we wouldn't have much idea at all! Strange old world is it not?

.
Thanks Mike, just gone on line and picked up a used copy, will enjoy reading this from a river keepers perspective.👌


What did you pay for it?
They were snapped up v quickly, many going to the USA where mine was eventually repatriated, brand new I paid around £50 for it some years ago.

If you get a chance buy an original copy of 'Keeper of the Stream' by Frank Sawyer. He was the first real 'thinker' when it came to river management and you will find it interesting to compare how the two treat the subject.

Frank Sawyer made a film about his river for the BBC back on the early days of black and white TV, the film had no sound and he gave a running commentary as the programme was transmitted. At Fordingbridge he did the same to us young keepers and enchanted the whole room into complete awe. When the film stopped it was as if the world had stopped turning, truely one of the most amazing experiences of my life.

:handshake:
'No Man Ever Fishes The Same River Twice, .... For It Is Not The Same River, .... And He Is Not The Same Man' Heraclitus of Ephesus
User avatar
Duncan Holmes
Barbel
Barbel
Posts: 4946
Joined: Mon Feb 20 2012 06:00
Location: In the heart of Norfolk
Contact:

Re: Wild Justice?

Post by Duncan Holmes »

greencard1 wrote: Sat Aug 01 2020 10:41 -
Duncan Holmes wrote: Sat Aug 01 2020 09:24 -
greencard1 wrote: Sat Aug 01 2020 09:00 -
davelumb wrote: Fri Jul 31 2020 08:25 -
As an example of WJ's mentality this is what Mark Avery thinks about Country File.

"We know that Countryfile has form in leaning towards the opinions, however ungrounded in facts, of farmers and shooters and we all have to take that as read."

https://wildjustice.org.uk/general/countryfile/
Farmers and anglers are portrayed in a similar way on mainstream media; mostly as buffoons. Most farming or large animal vet programmes are accompanied by stupid pizzicato music suggesting a comedic subject. The last successful angling programme was a couple of clowns (Whitehouse and Mortimer, both very good clowns) doing something that most of the general public sees as stupid (fishing). But at least it put fishing back on the BBC.
If Countryfile supports farmers, then good for them.
However, Countryfile is definitely not the angler's friend. I am referring to the programme that came from Calverton fish farm. It was a blatant demonstration of misinformation. It showed some young barbel being put into a growing-on pond with a current flowing through it to get them used to flowing water. Matt Baker explained that the barbel have to get used to predators "such as heron and kingfisher". The barbel were already twice as big as kingfisher, and the pond was deep with sheer sides, so not accessible to heron. No mention was made throughout the whole programme of the orange string that criss-crossed every pond on site, or what it was there to prevent, (cormorants).

Another Countryfile programme tackled the subject of otters killing carp at fisheries, and how it is possible to trap and remove them. There was a lot of footage of cormorants swallowing fish in this piece about otters (?); but the word "cormorant" was never used.

In another prime time BBC Sunday night programme, Countryfile's Ellie Harrison presented a one hour programme called 'England's Rivers'. There was not a cormorant in sight anywhere; just as if they did not exist. Every problem associated with England's rivers was attributed to mink. Especially falling kingfisher numbers.

I read a blog a while ago by Hugh Miles in which he said something like..'I have been filming with Ellie Harrison; I talked a lot about problems caused by otters; I hope the comments make it to the final cut'. They didn't.

As long as the BBC present anglers as buffoons and continue peddling misinformation, we will make no headway. Projects such as the clear water status disaster about to unfold on the Broads will go unchallenged, and angling will continue to decline. And Mark Avery and co. will have the last laugh.

(sorry if I have repeated myself here)
"Projects such as the clear water status disaster about to unfold on the Broads will go unchallenged"

It certainly isn't going unchallenged and that will continue.

Watch this space :wink:
Sorry Duncan; I meant unchallenged by the general public because they will not even know about it.
Well done to you and everyone fighting the scheme.
No apologies needed, I do know what you mean about the public, its up to angling to make it a public issue, we are the public after all.
"The opinions expressed in any of my posts are my own and do not reflect the view of the any organisation that I may be associated with."
Stewlaws
Barbel
Barbel
Posts: 2597
Joined: Thu Dec 28 2017 16:49

Re: Wild Justice?

Post by Stewlaws »

Mike J wrote: Sat Aug 01 2020 10:41 -
Stewlaws wrote: Sat Aug 01 2020 10:23 -
Mike J wrote: Sat Aug 01 2020 09:39 -
Stewlaws wrote: Fri Jul 31 2020 10:59 -
Mike J wrote: Fri Jul 31 2020 07:15 -
Stewlaws wrote: Thu Jul 30 2020 09:15 -
Mike J wrote: Wed Jul 29 2020 08:37 -
greencard1 wrote: Mon Jul 27 2020 10:12 -
Duncan Holmes wrote: Mon Jul 27 2020 07:13 -
greencard1 wrote: Fri Jul 17 2020 21:08 -
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'.
like it or not they are right and the science backs up their claim.

Whether its sustainable is another question, that unfortunately both sides will struggle to prove.
Kev posted a while ago that Trent chub and barbel have a faster growth rate than chub and barbel on other rivers.
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.

.
Difficult to quantify Mike without having data to hand I would think, knowing how variables can influence the ecology and my experience of those that overtly manage the environment against those that covert manage ... It's a diverse pitch we play on with extremes, speaking with someone who had 30 plus years experience on foxing on commercial shoots he learnt more on fox behaviour using thermal imaging in a 12 month period than the previous 30+.
I believe our biggest mistake is going on anecdotal reports/evidence..... I've been guilty on that basis, everything I read or heard from an older generation was gospel in my eyes, nowadays I find scientific based reading more reliable in piecing together the facts, although this is usually game based not riparian.

Was down at Stockbridge looking at the Houghton stretch .... Just screaming quality,but found myself wondering if their management has changed much over the years, I'm sure it has.

Hi Stew, the two sections of river I mentioned have been in continuous management by two respective keepers who's time on the banks totals over 50years, it was likewise with their respective predecessors.
Your visit to the Houghton water is a similar example, where until recently, three generations of the Lunn family * had keepered the water since 1887.

The problem with any management of our countryside is that the subject was never studied in great detial until the Nature Conservancy Council was established in 1949. Even today very few areas have baseline studies and that sadly includes many of our SSSI's and this lack means the effects of various forms of management cannot be accurately correlated.
It has been my experience that individuals with a long association with a particular area or subject can be of exceptional value when assessing its potential and determining long term management objectives.

* "Years ago the Test was always crystal-clear. When I was a boy at school in Andover, it was a little market town. Now it's almost the size of a city and its waste water is finding its way into the river. They are still building more houses, though, and I have no idea where the water is going to come from to feed its domestic and commercial plumbing demands. Also, the weed in the river is not so prolific, particularly ranunculus, which acts as a filter and cleans up the river. " Mick Lunn Headkeeper to the Houghton Club 1963-1992

.
Hi Mike,

Without being a dramatist,the fact that the older generation when recounting their experiences are now discussing a by-gone era, which sounded golden, in reality at the young age of 52 myself, I've seen huge changes in diversity amongst certain species that my children won't see in numbers, the progression of the human population seems destined to serve only to drive numbers down evermore, I watched an episode of Jack Charlton last night goose flighting on the firth ... then with the late great Archie Coats on the pigeons, one species that has done well in population oddly! Anyone with time to sit with a gun rod or camera will appreciate those moments ... but for the vast they will never understand what diversity ever meant in nature.

Did you extract the words of Lunn from a book? Curious.

Hi Stew,

Mick Lunn's quote is from his memoir 'A Particular Lunn: A Hundred Glorious Years on the Test' in my library, a book I can highly recommend.
Mick Lunn along with Frank Sawyer are the only two river keepers who have been afforded a Telegraph obituary, I was privileged to meet the latter but sadly never the former.
I have fished the Test in several places and as you say it looks almost unreal that a river could ever be so perfect. I know of 7+Chub and 30+Pike and would happiely give a chunk of my pension for week to coarse fish it, sadly all the best water is closed through the winter to protect the banks.

Major Archie Coats, now there is a name from the golden era of pigeon shooting, and someone I have also met, when he gave us a talk on my keepers course at Fordingbridge. He described rolling a wet wine bottle in wood ash and decoying pigeons down to it, something I tried, unsuccessfully.

The one thing we do know is that nature can adapt to change and just because a species ceases to exist in one area is doesn't mean it is not thriving somewhere else.
The lack of a baseline means we never know what was actually present before we arrived and began our 'management'. Oddly enough if it wasn't for the Victorians and their collections (dare I say trophies) we wouldn't have much idea at all! Strange old world is it not?

.
Thanks Mike, just gone on line and picked up a used copy, will enjoy reading this from a river keepers perspective.👌


What did you pay for it?
They were snapped up v quickly, many going to the USA where mine was eventually repatriated, brand new I paid around £50 for it some years ago.

If you get a chance buy an original copy of 'Keeper of the Stream' by Frank Sawyer. He was the first real 'thinker' when it came to river management and you will find it interesting to compare how the two treat the subject.

Frank Sawyer made a film about his river for the BBC back on the early days of black and white TV, the film had no sound and he gave a running commentary as the programme was transmitted. At Fordingbridge he did the same to us young keepers and enchanted the whole room into complete awe. When the film stopped it was as if the world had stopped turning, truely one of the most amazing experiences of my life.

:handshake:
Morning Mike

Paid the supreme price of £3.33 including postage ... absolute bargain, I'm sure I will enjoy reading about the test .
Kev Berry

Re: Wild Justice?

Post by Kev Berry »

greencard1 wrote: Mon Jul 27 2020 10:12 -
Duncan Holmes wrote: Mon Jul 27 2020 07:13 -
greencard1 wrote: Fri Jul 17 2020 21:08 -
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'.
like it or not they are right and the science backs up their claim.

Whether its sustainable is another question, that unfortunately both sides will struggle to prove.
Kev posted a while ago that Trent chub and barbel have a faster growth rate than chub and barbel on other rivers.
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.
The growth rates compare with records a 100 years ago (before pollution wiped the barbel out)
The Trent is rammed with silvers, has been for many years
The Trent is just an exceptional river where chub and barbel thrive
User avatar
Bob Watson
Zander
Zander
Posts: 8029
Joined: Sun Aug 28 2011 05:00
Location: Stockton on Redacted

Re: Wild Justice?

Post by Bob Watson »

Stewlaws wrote: Sun Aug 02 2020 09:26 -
Mike J wrote: Sat Aug 01 2020 10:41 -
Stewlaws wrote: Sat Aug 01 2020 10:23 -
Mike J wrote: Sat Aug 01 2020 09:39 -
Stewlaws wrote: Fri Jul 31 2020 10:59 -
Mike J wrote: Fri Jul 31 2020 07:15 -
Stewlaws wrote: Thu Jul 30 2020 09:15 -
Mike J wrote: Wed Jul 29 2020 08:37 -
greencard1 wrote: Mon Jul 27 2020 10:12 -
Duncan Holmes wrote: Mon Jul 27 2020 07:13 -
greencard1 wrote: Fri Jul 17 2020 21:08 -
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'.
like it or not they are right and the science backs up their claim.

Whether its sustainable is another question, that unfortunately both sides will struggle to prove.
Kev posted a while ago that Trent chub and barbel have a faster growth rate than chub and barbel on other rivers.
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.

.
Difficult to quantify Mike without having data to hand I would think, knowing how variables can influence the ecology and my experience of those that overtly manage the environment against those that covert manage ... It's a diverse pitch we play on with extremes, speaking with someone who had 30 plus years experience on foxing on commercial shoots he learnt more on fox behaviour using thermal imaging in a 12 month period than the previous 30+.
I believe our biggest mistake is going on anecdotal reports/evidence..... I've been guilty on that basis, everything I read or heard from an older generation was gospel in my eyes, nowadays I find scientific based reading more reliable in piecing together the facts, although this is usually game based not riparian.

Was down at Stockbridge looking at the Houghton stretch .... Just screaming quality,but found myself wondering if their management has changed much over the years, I'm sure it has.

Hi Stew, the two sections of river I mentioned have been in continuous management by two respective keepers who's time on the banks totals over 50years, it was likewise with their respective predecessors.
Your visit to the Houghton water is a similar example, where until recently, three generations of the Lunn family * had keepered the water since 1887.

The problem with any management of our countryside is that the subject was never studied in great detial until the Nature Conservancy Council was established in 1949. Even today very few areas have baseline studies and that sadly includes many of our SSSI's and this lack means the effects of various forms of management cannot be accurately correlated.
It has been my experience that individuals with a long association with a particular area or subject can be of exceptional value when assessing its potential and determining long term management objectives.

* "Years ago the Test was always crystal-clear. When I was a boy at school in Andover, it was a little market town. Now it's almost the size of a city and its waste water is finding its way into the river. They are still building more houses, though, and I have no idea where the water is going to come from to feed its domestic and commercial plumbing demands. Also, the weed in the river is not so prolific, particularly ranunculus, which acts as a filter and cleans up the river. " Mick Lunn Headkeeper to the Houghton Club 1963-1992

.
Hi Mike,

Without being a dramatist,the fact that the older generation when recounting their experiences are now discussing a by-gone era, which sounded golden, in reality at the young age of 52 myself, I've seen huge changes in diversity amongst certain species that my children won't see in numbers, the progression of the human population seems destined to serve only to drive numbers down evermore, I watched an episode of Jack Charlton last night goose flighting on the firth ... then with the late great Archie Coats on the pigeons, one species that has done well in population oddly! Anyone with time to sit with a gun rod or camera will appreciate those moments ... but for the vast they will never understand what diversity ever meant in nature.

Did you extract the words of Lunn from a book? Curious.

Hi Stew,

Mick Lunn's quote is from his memoir 'A Particular Lunn: A Hundred Glorious Years on the Test' in my library, a book I can highly recommend.
Mick Lunn along with Frank Sawyer are the only two river keepers who have been afforded a Telegraph obituary, I was privileged to meet the latter but sadly never the former.
I have fished the Test in several places and as you say it looks almost unreal that a river could ever be so perfect. I know of 7+Chub and 30+Pike and would happiely give a chunk of my pension for week to coarse fish it, sadly all the best water is closed through the winter to protect the banks.

Major Archie Coats, now there is a name from the golden era of pigeon shooting, and someone I have also met, when he gave us a talk on my keepers course at Fordingbridge. He described rolling a wet wine bottle in wood ash and decoying pigeons down to it, something I tried, unsuccessfully.

The one thing we do know is that nature can adapt to change and just because a species ceases to exist in one area is doesn't mean it is not thriving somewhere else.
The lack of a baseline means we never know what was actually present before we arrived and began our 'management'. Oddly enough if it wasn't for the Victorians and their collections (dare I say trophies) we wouldn't have much idea at all! Strange old world is it not?

.
Thanks Mike, just gone on line and picked up a used copy, will enjoy reading this from a river keepers perspective.👌


What did you pay for it?
They were snapped up v quickly, many going to the USA where mine was eventually repatriated, brand new I paid around £50 for it some years ago.

If you get a chance buy an original copy of 'Keeper of the Stream' by Frank Sawyer. He was the first real 'thinker' when it came to river management and you will find it interesting to compare how the two treat the subject.

Frank Sawyer made a film about his river for the BBC back on the early days of black and white TV, the film had no sound and he gave a running commentary as the programme was transmitted. At Fordingbridge he did the same to us young keepers and enchanted the whole room into complete awe. When the film stopped it was as if the world had stopped turning, truely one of the most amazing experiences of my life.

:handshake:
Morning Mike

Paid the supreme price of £3.33 including postage ... absolute bargain, I'm sure I will enjoy reading about the test .
Just ordered a copy myself, £2.69 inc' postage!
User avatar
Bob Watson
Zander
Zander
Posts: 8029
Joined: Sun Aug 28 2011 05:00
Location: Stockton on Redacted

Re: Wild Justice?

Post by Bob Watson »

:thumbs: Just noticed this thread, a good, interesting read!
greencard1
Perch
Perch
Posts: 850
Joined: Mon Feb 03 2020 05:30

Re: Wild Justice?

Post by greencard1 »

Wild Justice are taking DEFRA to the High Court next week over the legalities of releasing non-native game birds in the UK.

Farming Today on Radio 4 this morning was interesting. Mark Avery stating that Wild Justice do not want to ban shooting. Really?

Listen to it on BBC iplayer.

Next week will be interesting, and could have implications for Angling.
User avatar
davelumb
Forum Sponsor
Forum Sponsor
Posts: 42342
Joined: Sat Aug 27 2011 05:00
Location: On some faraway beach
Contact:

Re: Wild Justice?

Post by davelumb »

greencard1 wrote: Fri Oct 30 2020 07:14 -
Wild Justice are taking DEFRA to the High Court next week over the legalities of releasing non-native game birds in the UK.

Farming Today on Radio 4 this morning was interesting. Mark Avery stating that Wild Justice do not want to ban shooting. Really?

Listen to it on BBC iplayer.

Next week will be interesting, and could have implications for Angling.
They don't want to ban shooting. Yet.
Stewlaws
Barbel
Barbel
Posts: 2597
Joined: Thu Dec 28 2017 16:49

Re: Wild Justice?

Post by Stewlaws »

If lead is banned wholesale on shooting then that in itself would bring about a seismic change, unfortunately animal welfare would suffer as well, if steel shot was the preferred replacement... As bismuth and tungsten are so cost prohibited, I have some Eley 28 guage bismuth that retail at £45.00 per box ..

Shooting will be regulated against by the back door I feel ..
User avatar
Mike J
Ferox Trout
Ferox Trout
Posts: 11094
Joined: Wed Nov 09 2016 09:26
Location: Wessex

Re: Wild Justice?

Post by Mike J »

davelumb wrote: Fri Oct 30 2020 09:25 -
greencard1 wrote: Fri Oct 30 2020 07:14 -
Wild Justice are taking DEFRA to the High Court next week over the legalities of releasing non-native game birds in the UK.

Farming Today on Radio 4 this morning was interesting. Mark Avery stating that Wild Justice do not want to ban shooting. Really?

Listen to it on BBC iplayer.

Next week will be interesting, and could have implications for Angling.
They don't want to ban shooting. Yet.


You dont have to ban any field sport to stop it being enjoyed, you simply strangle it with a self locking snare of its own making.

But first a Legal precedence has to be clearly established.

.



.
'No Man Ever Fishes The Same River Twice, .... For It Is Not The Same River, .... And He Is Not The Same Man' Heraclitus of Ephesus
User avatar
davelumb
Forum Sponsor
Forum Sponsor
Posts: 42342
Joined: Sat Aug 27 2011 05:00
Location: On some faraway beach
Contact:

Re: Wild Justice?

Post by davelumb »

I wonder if WJ will be satisfied? (Rhetorical question :wink:

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/defr ... cted-sites
User avatar
DaveGreenwood
Zander
Zander
Posts: 5608
Joined: Sun Aug 28 2011 05:00
Location: On Top

Re: Wild Justice?

Post by DaveGreenwood »

Iv been convinced for a long time that fishing is slowly being eroded by stealth, access being limited, rules to exclude fishing, but not acting on the Cormorant issue is the biggest problem my local res has been decimated by these flying eating machines to the point that its not worth fishing anymore, getting a license to shoot a few wont change anything and is very difficult to obtain anyway. Its just a matter of time because we are a fragmented sport/pastime.
JohnCopeman
Perch
Perch
Posts: 723
Joined: Fri Oct 25 2019 11:29

Re: Wild Justice?

Post by JohnCopeman »

These two have already managed to stop a great deal of wildfowling on the Humber so far this season....Natural England won't issue the consents until they have checked the " Loophole" wild justice are exploiting.
Steel shot is far better than it was when lead was first restricted in use for wildfowl BUT BASC ain't putting up much of an argument even recommended a voluntary ban of its use to carry public favour....there previous chair John Swift said "leads had its day time to move on".......then we found out he had his own agenda....
It's far too easy to get the minimum amount of signatures on line these days to get a hearing.....in the old days it took actual paperwork and time unfortunately it's almost instant in the modern world.
Stewlaws
Barbel
Barbel
Posts: 2597
Joined: Thu Dec 28 2017 16:49

Re: Wild Justice?

Post by Stewlaws »

JohnCopeman wrote: Mon Nov 02 2020 16:43 -
These two have already managed to stop a great deal of wildfowling on the Humber so far this season....Natural England won't issue the consents until they have checked the " Loophole" wild justice are exploiting.
Steel shot is far better than it was when lead was first restricted in use for wildfowl BUT BASC ain't putting up much of an argument even recommended a voluntary ban of its use to carry public favour....there previous chair John Swift said "leads had its day time to move on".......then we found out he had his own agenda....
It's far too easy to get the minimum amount of signatures on line these days to get a hearing.....in the old days it took actual paperwork and time unfortunately it's almost instant in the modern world.

John , I was never convinced by the inertia converted into energy by steel, watched many mallard hit by steel that went on, then when picked up, several strikes that would just drill through the bird, lead was and is superior in that aspect, unfortunately the stealth Lobby against shooting is at work.
JohnCopeman
Perch
Perch
Posts: 723
Joined: Fri Oct 25 2019 11:29

Re: Wild Justice?

Post by JohnCopeman »

Initial steel- soft iron actually WAS rubbish..it was rushed and the cartridge manufacturers used existing primers and powders etc.
Now they have progressed and admitted it can never be as good as lead ballistaclly it is almost as good....almost. I use it on ducks and geese and hardly ever have to spend time chasing runners with the dog.
Stewlaws
Barbel
Barbel
Posts: 2597
Joined: Thu Dec 28 2017 16:49

Re: Wild Justice?

Post by Stewlaws »

JohnCopeman wrote: Mon Nov 02 2020 20:49 -
Initial steel- soft iron actually WAS rubbish..it was rushed and the cartridge manufacturers used existing primers and powders etc.
Now they have progressed and admitted it can never be as good as lead ballistaclly it is almost as good....almost. I use it on ducks and geese and hardly ever have to spend time chasing runners with the dog.


Going back when the ban on lead was introduced around wetlands and sssi.. a commercial shoot I would beat for use to have a series of duck 🦆 ponds, through a valley, end of day was always the ducks, 14,000 released, the shoot owner would charge slightly less on big corporate days, use to have British gas and rolls Royce turn up double gunning, ( before the anti competition and corruption laws were in place) 1000 bird days ... slaughter really.

Anyway the shoot stipulated steel initially, until after a few shoots the number of pricked birds was phenomenal.. all carrying hits but not killing them, it reverted back fairly quickly as on a commercial point unviable and morally wrong, for the suffering ( not sure morals entered big bird days!)

Give them their due the ducks would be well up and sporting but nothing to the wild duck on a winter's night flight...

Duck shooting went very out of vogue and really has never got a foothold since on the commercial shoots or syndicate shoots locally since... thankfully.
Will Smith
James Holgate Award Winner 2023
James Holgate Award Winner 2023
Posts: 4079
Joined: Sun Aug 28 2011 05:00
Location: Snods Edge, Northumberland

Re: Wild Justice?

Post by Will Smith »

Stewlaws wrote: Fri Nov 06 2020 12:01 -
JohnCopeman wrote: Mon Nov 02 2020 20:49 -
Initial steel- soft iron actually WAS rubbish..it was rushed and the cartridge manufacturers used existing primers and powders etc.
Now they have progressed and admitted it can never be as good as lead ballistaclly it is almost as good....almost. I use it on ducks and geese and hardly ever have to spend time chasing runners with the dog.


Going back when the ban on lead was introduced around wetlands and sssi.. a commercial shoot I would beat for use to have a series of duck 🦆 ponds, through a valley, end of day was always the ducks, 14,000 released, the shoot owner would charge slightly less on big corporate days, use to have British gas and rolls Royce turn up double gunning, ( before the anti competition and corruption laws were in place) 1000 bird days ... slaughter really.

Anyway the shoot stipulated steel initially, until after a few shoots the number of pricked birds was phenomenal.. all carrying hits but not killing them, it reverted back fairly quickly as on a commercial point unviable and morally wrong, for the suffering ( not sure morals entered big bird days!)

Give them their due the ducks would be well up and sporting but nothing to the wild duck on a winter's night flight...

Duck shooting went very out of vogue and really has never got a foothold since on the commercial shoots or syndicate shoots locally since... thankfully.
It is exactly that type of ridiculous behaviour Stew that will ultimately be the end of our sport, we need to get our act together on that front, I know shoots were unfortunately it still goes on.

Will.
Stewlaws
Barbel
Barbel
Posts: 2597
Joined: Thu Dec 28 2017 16:49

Re: Wild Justice?

Post by Stewlaws »

Will Smith wrote: Fri Nov 06 2020 20:55 -
Stewlaws wrote: Fri Nov 06 2020 12:01 -
JohnCopeman wrote: Mon Nov 02 2020 20:49 -
Initial steel- soft iron actually WAS rubbish..it was rushed and the cartridge manufacturers used existing primers and powders etc.
Now they have progressed and admitted it can never be as good as lead ballistaclly it is almost as good....almost. I use it on ducks and geese and hardly ever have to spend time chasing runners with the dog.


Going back when the ban on lead was introduced around wetlands and sssi.. a commercial shoot I would beat for use to have a series of duck 🦆 ponds, through a valley, end of day was always the ducks, 14,000 released, the shoot owner would charge slightly less on big corporate days, use to have British gas and rolls Royce turn up double gunning, ( before the anti competition and corruption laws were in place) 1000 bird days ... slaughter really.

Anyway the shoot stipulated steel initially, until after a few shoots the number of pricked birds was phenomenal.. all carrying hits but not killing them, it reverted back fairly quickly as on a commercial point unviable and morally wrong, for the suffering ( not sure morals entered big bird days!)

Give them their due the ducks would be well up and sporting but nothing to the wild duck on a winter's night flight...

Duck shooting went very out of vogue and really has never got a foothold since on the commercial shoots or syndicate shoots locally since... thankfully.
It is exactly that type of ridiculous behaviour Stew that will ultimately be the end of our sport, we need to get our act together on that front, I know shoots were unfortunately it still goes on.

Will.
Totally agree Will, we spoon feed reasons to organisations like Packhams, WJ... regulate ourselves or the people regulating won't be so partisan.

Shame as fieldsports are the very fabric of our country side.
greencard1
Perch
Perch
Posts: 850
Joined: Mon Feb 03 2020 05:30

Re: Wild Justice?

Post by greencard1 »

I think DEFRA avoided the court case by rolling out its own license scheme for releasing game birds.
Wild Justice of course are claiming this as a victory, however, the subject of game birds was not discussed in court (something that WJ wanted to happen), and DEFRA saved the government a lot of money by not going to court.

All in all, probably not a bad result.
JohnCopeman
Perch
Perch
Posts: 723
Joined: Fri Oct 25 2019 11:29

Re: Wild Justice?

Post by JohnCopeman »

600m is a lot better than 5km though.
Post Reply