Duncan Holmes wrote:
Not quite yet......
I used the term, OUR environment because that is actually what it became once we started "managing" it, the environment will never be THEIR environment unless something catastrophic happens to the human species.
The question I asked is why you would group otters alongside 3 invasive and highly destructive species within a discussion on culling?
Those other species are never likely to find a natural balance and need to be controlled to protect the environment.
Your answer doesn't really cover that,
Your move.
Now I like this game
The reason I changed " ours" to "theirs" is that although I totally agree with you in that we have changed the environment so much, we now have to manage it and learn to do whats best, we still have lots to learn and still make mistakes, often acting in self serving ways, the otter will have no comprehension to all that and so continue to live in "their" environment one which is different to what we think it should be.
All of those species can find a natural balance with their environment, but like the otter it may be detrimental to other species such as the water vole from mink predation. The mink is the only one of those I would choose to eradicate if it was possible even if I do think they are smart critters.
Near where I live, there used to be the biggest colony of cormorants in the UK, their numbers have since dropped, indicating a balance forming.
Their move inland happened from about the time of the demise of the eel, coincidence?, I think not, the majority of eels are said to remain in estuaries where the pickings are good and the species of cormorant we see is sometimes referred to as the "estuarine cormorant" for that reason.
The effects that cormorant predation will have upon a water will vary and if the management of a fishery think they are having a severe adverse effect then they can be controlled to some extent them with a suitable weapon, how effective this will be I dont know unless lots of fisheries nationally take part.
I do wish more people would see the birds simply as they are and control them simply for the need of control and not with hate.
My form of control at the marina is simply clapping my hands, the birds seem very sensitive and reactive to noise and so I wonder the effect of crow scarers to protect a water when anglers are not there?
Now seals, common seals are our most likely inland visitor and without googling I would estimate they could take upto 30 lbs of fish in a day, although removing them alive would be the best option I would guess a suitable gun would be far cheaper.
Given their size they shouldn't be too hard to find and being common by name and common by nature the odd individual shot will be no loss to the species.
The reason I put all 4 species together (there are more I could mention) was that in my opinion we have forced the task of looking after the environment upon ourselves often because of our own actions.
The daft thing is that our control is attempting to put things back to how they were, we need to prop some species up which may ultimately require the
for others or simply a fence.
Work is needed from the bottom up such as restoring flow levels to rivers and reducing run off, its a massive subject
Some anglers will selfishly want their needs met to the expense of all other species without a care to the bigger picture, but if this bigger picture is controlled or managed properly, angling will have to take a hit as this unnatural environment we now find ourselves in has created so many of the big fish that adorn our albums and as I once said, a 9lb barbel will again be a big fish.
Knight takes Queen
Cheers Alan
"Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity" Seneca, some Roman chap.
Daves version of things is much more interesting
, 
next you will be saying magpies 
I could see them behind your virtual pint of mild 
right then, were not on the clock are we? 
