Reason why Cormorants are protected?

MarkD.

Was out today for duck, seen Cormorants at large and causing havoc!:mad: Also we counted loads of them definetly 10+ so I beg the question, foxes are vermin as they kill lambs, birds, etc, mink are vermin as they'd kill nearly anything, and magpies and grey crows play there evil part too. Then why do cormorants escape in all fairness?

We have some of the best fresh water fishing in the world, and salmon stocks are low. Having so many Cormorants around isnt helping no one.

Please discuss and share your views as to why they are protected and are not treated like all other vermin?

meathstevie

Personally I'm a bid puzzled that they're protected as well but since that's the case it's not a good idea to drop them no matter how much you'd want to.

mallards

In the North anyway, I think fishing clubs can apply for a special license to cull them if they are proven to be damaging their fish stocks.

Mallards

marlin vs

As far as I know you can apply here in the south also, but i'm not sure.I shoot on the Barrow and the Suir and iv'e seen up to 30 of them together,it's ridicules that they are not classed as vermin.There's a pair of them that can be seen regularly from the bridge into Waterford that hunt together one opposide the other and can be seen catching plenty of fish,sometimes flat's that they have to leve go because they are too wide to swallow.

cavan shooter

MarkD. wrote: »

Was out today for duck, seen Cormorants at large and causing havoc!:mad: Also we counted loads of them definetly 10+ so I beg the question, foxes are vermin as they kill lambs, birds, etc, mink are vermin as they'd kill nearly anything, and magpies and grey crows play there evil part too. Then why do cormorants escape in all fairness?

We have some of the best fresh water fishing in the world, and salmon stocks are low. Having so many Cormorants around isnt helping no one.

Please discuss and share your views as to why they are protected and are not treated like all other vermin?

Not being funny but is it Cormorants (black lads live at or near the sea or estuary) or Herons, Tall lads grey that empty your fish pond long pointy beak with a quif on there heads.....That is causing the grief

marlin vs

cavan shooter wrote: »

Not being funny but is it Cormorants (black lads live at or near the sea or estuary) or Herons, Tall lads grey that empty your fish pond long pointy beak with a quif on there heads.....That is causing the grief

Here you go.

deerhunter1

marlin vs wrote: »

Here you go.

I stand to be corrected on this, but if my memory serves me well I remember 25/30 years ref to shooting/controlling cormorants they could only be shot while sitting on their nest, and only by a range warden, also you could only use a shotgun because of bullets ricocheting off water, I remember something about this a long time ago.

cavan shooter

marlin vs wrote: »

Here you go.

Thanks what harm are they doing ye, train them to fish like the add on the tilly:D

Half-cocked

Cormorants have seen a big population increase since being protected under the Wildlife Act. They can be culled if a section 42 is granted but this is rare. They do eat a lot of eels, which in turn eat a lot of salmolid eggs and fry, so its not clear cut that they are damaging fisheries. They do both good and bad from an anglers perspective.

Vegeta

I think they are protected because their numbers are not that high. They are amber listed here. There are some in my locality, maybe 30-40 but the number remains constant whereas there are hundreds of duck.

Opening a season for the Cormorants would have a big effect on their breeding abilities.

steyrman2

the main proplem is there becoming fresh water predetors spending more time on the rivers than at sea there was a study on them on the slaney a few years ago the damage that there doing was massive problem with the slaney there is slamon,seatrout ,and brown trout in the river where the barrow as a lot of other species i know the cormorants are protected what about the shags you see the difference with the white chest on them

MarkD.

meathstevie wrote: »

Personally I'm a bid puzzled that they're protected as well but since that's the case it's not a good idea to drop them no matter how much you'd want to.

Never been tempted to shoot them as I value my licence.
I do a nice bit of fly fishing in the Summer, but lately seen loads of Cormorants around and it just puzzled me as to why they are not controlled. Been talking to other lads and they said the numbers are on the rise, there becoming more of an inland bird then a coastal one.

Half-cocked

steyrman2 wrote: »

the cormorants are protected what about the shags you see the difference with the white chest on them

The white breasted ones are juvenile cormorants. Shags will rarely be found on freshwater. Shags lack the white cheeks of the cormorants. they are also smaller and slightly different colour, but you wouldn't really notice the difference unless you saw them side by side. Shags are protected too.

fodda

Why are you queering why a wild bird cant eat its natural food and want to have it culled? Its not affecting livestock or is it?

John_Rambo

steyrman2 wrote: »

there was a study on them on the slaney a few years ago the damage that there doing was massive problem with the slaney

Where is the study? I canoed the Slaney a few years ago, the pollution would be a concern of mine in that area, came across lots of obvious run-off pollution, carcasses and dead fish.

Amazing river though. Great fun and beautiful.

rugerman

own on the suir there is 3 different trees that could have around 30 cormorands on each how do u go about gettin a liscence to cull them a lad was telling me they eat 2lb of fish each a day im not doing the maths on that one if there that many. sickning!!!!!!!!

4gun

talk about greed...:mad:

John_Rambo

rugerman wrote: »

sickning!!!!!!!!

An excellent indication that fish stocks must be very very healthy. Good news, not exactly sickening.

Edit... as HalfCocked said, they seem to eat mainly eals. Everytime I see one eat they are eating eals. I reckon culling them would upset things.

fodda

John_Rambo wrote: »

An excellent indication that fish stocks must be very very healthy. Good news, not exactly sickening.

Edit... as HalfCocked said, they seem to eat mainly eals. Everytime I see one eat they are eating eals. I reckon culling them would upset things.

Very very true nature can sort itself out quite easily without the help of people. Besides if they eat fish/eels fresh or sea water it's natural.

beretta686s

they will eat any fish they can catch and swallow and i mean any,they have a paracidic worm in their stomach and have to eat their own weight in fish everyday or the worms will eat them so thats a lot of fish.have shot them 4 waters way ireland/OPW.For a cousin of mine did't belive him about the worm till i cut 1 open and saw them. my 2 cents

John_Rambo

It could mean that with all the rain we are getting eel stocks are too high, this could threaten other fish in the river systems and the cormorants are cashing in, thus helping the eco system.

I think proper surveys need to be taken by the OPW or whoever before we start relying on individuals evidence seeing them eating loads or seeing loads of them sitting in trees.

MarkD.

fodda wrote: »

Why are you queering why a wild bird cant eat its natural food and want to have it culled? Its not affecting livestock or is it?

Im queering because its called an open discussion and Im eager to learn more about decisions our government makes regarding our wildlife practices and rules.

As for affecting livestock, no they are not as I dont have livestock. But there is a man made fishery locally and no doubt they are under some pressure due to cormorants taking stocks of fish put in their for the sport of fishing.
In some cases, fox's dont affect livestock but are culled. Im curious as to why Cormorants escape this when as another member said he witnessed there effects by low fish stocks and another stated he cut open their stomach to prove they eat lots of fish aswel as eels.

Not taking a dig at you, just stating its an open discussion forum.

4gun wrote: »

talk about greed...:mad:

Greed on who's behalf? Mine for asking a simple question, fisherman for wanting more fish stocks or the Cormorants for eating so much fish?

beretta686s wrote: »

they will eat any fish they can catch and swallow and i mean any,they have a paracidic worm in their stomach and have to eat their own weight in fish everyday or the worms will eat them so thats a lot of fish.have shot them 4 waters way ireland/OPW.For a cousin of mine did't belive him about the worm till i cut 1 open and saw them. my 2 cents

Thats what Ive been told too by local lads I know.
Noticed some cormorants trying to get off the water after feeding themselves and as far as I can see they are so full they have to put alot of effort into the take off. Im no nature expert Im just saying what Ive seen and heard myself.

John_Rambo wrote: »

It could mean that with all the rain we are getting eel stocks are too high, this could threaten other fish in the river systems and the cormorants are cashing in, thus helping the eco system.

I think proper surveys need to be taken by the OPW or whoever before we start relying on individuals evidence seeing them eating loads or seeing loads of them sitting in trees.

Have you an idea why Cormorants became protected? Did the department of the environment or the OPW take a detailed count using experts in this field or did they just jump to bird lovers crys to protect these birds.

fodda

Have you an idea why Cormorants became protected? Did the department of the environment or the OPW take a detailed count using experts in this field or did they just jump to bird lovers crys to protect these birds.

I see countryside rangers ( i think thats what they are called) doing bird counts reguarly along the shorelines with spotting scopes? I know they are counting different bird species cause i was talking to one and he told me it is something they are always doing.

MarkD.

fodda wrote: »

I see countryside rangers ( i think thats what they are called) doing bird counts reguarly along the shorelines with spotting scopes? I know they are counting different bird species cause i was talking to one and he told me it is something they are always doing.

Thanks for the reply. I didnt know rangers were that active as Ive never met one and Ive never seen one about.

Birdnuts

Vegeta wrote: »

Opening a season for the Cormorants would have a big effect on their breeding abilities.

Exactly - comparing this species to foxes is off the wall given their respective reproductive capabilities. Also the idea that they are somehow a major factor behind declines in game fish populations does not stand up to any rational scrutiny and i seriously doubt there is any study by professional fish scientists that would back up that claim.

The factors behind declines in the populations of Salmon and Sea trout have been well investigated and are well known by both anglers and conservationists. Indeed one doesn't have to be a scientist to see how the massive destruction of spawning grounds in the uplands, increasing pollution generally, drift netting, fish farming, dams etc. have destroyed stocks in the vast majority of our rivers and lakes:(

John_Rambo

MarkD. wrote: »

Have you an idea why Cormorants became protected

I would imagine to stop over zealous, self appointed rangers culling them after thinking there were to many of them when all they saw was an inland breeding colony!

Again, I would be more worried and active when it comes to pollution.

bibio

There are serveral peer reviewed and independant studies into Cormorant predation of Salmonids. Google and you will find them, one on the Slaney should be available on the Slaney River trust site, some better studies out of Scotland.
The issues are complicated, but Cormorants are increasing, they are also changing their habits and moving inshore much more and for longer periods of time (IMHO due to fish stock collapse at sea due to overfishing).
Cormorants in themselves should not be regarded as vermin, in the normal course of things, if stocks of Salmonids were very healthy, they would not cause too much damage.
But they can cause serious local damage to already depleted fish stocks in river systems that are below their minimum spawning escapement targets, this damage is done in March, April and May during the Salmonid smolt run, and there is a very strong argument of selective culling on these rivers during this period.
Cormorants also predate heavily on eels, but the stocks of eels are in even worse state than salmonids.
Rgds
Bibio

LostCovey

beretta686s wrote: »

they will eat any fish they can catch and swallow and i mean any,they have a paracidic worm in their stomach and have to eat their own weight in fish everyday or the worms will eat them so thats a lot of fish.have shot them 4 waters way ireland/OPW.For a cousin of mine did't belive him about the worm till i cut 1 open and saw them. my 2 cents

They do carry parasites, as do all animals including humans.

The idea that this is why they fish, or that the worms will eat them if they don't is clearly absurd.

Cormorants are predators of fish in the same way as otters are. Should we shoot the otters too?

Little Egrets eat fish too. What about them?

I really do not understand the mindset behind the question - that we should be able to shoot everything unless there is a reason not to. Why not leave them alone?

As another poster pointed out, if we all directed our energy at pollution control and reporting incidents, I think there would be plenty of fish for all including the poor oul Cormorant.

LostCovey

Birdnuts

bibio wrote: »

There are serveral peer reviewed and independant studies into Cormorant predation of Salmonids. Google and you will find them, one on the Slaney should be available on the Slaney River trust site, some better studies out of Scotland.

We know as "fish-eating" birds they will occasionally take salmonids so if these are the "studies" you are referring to, their hardly revelationary!!. But I have yet to see any study that suggests their a major factor in salmonoid declines in this part of the world. If individual Cormorants are causing major problems for a commercial fishery owner then a licence can be applied for allowing the culling of offending individuals - I have no problem with this. However blaming Cormorants for the state of our game fisheries makes as much sense as blaming puffins for the collapse in Cod stocks in the North Atlantic:rolleyes:

Feargal as Luimneach

LostCovey wrote: »

Little Egrets eat fish too. What about them?

I really do not understand the mindset behind the question - that we should be able to shoot everything unless there is a reason not to. Why not leave them alone?



LostCovey

I saw me ten Little eejits last week in Wexford. I saw them ate three fish. That be too many I'd say. They should be culled now......

bibio

Just to clarify my last post as some of the replies seem to miss my point.
I'm not advocating a cull, but rather pointing out there is strong argument for one.
All things being equal there should be no need to consider any cull of Cormorants, but on certain river systems in Ireland that have not recovered from the ravages of pollution, drift netting, poaching, water abstraction et al, Salmonid species are barely hanging on, and are signiifncaty below their minimum escapement target to sustain a population.
I'm not saying cull cormorants, what I am saying is that on these rivers, such as the Slaney, which is unique for its unique multi sea winter salmon run, that some sort of cull, scare methods, should be considered during the smolt run. I have seen with my own eyes on many, many occasions, groups of between two and five cormorants fishing in groups, every half mile or so from Oilgate up to Bunclody, make no mistake the predation during this period is significant.
This isnt as black and white, as Fish V Cormorant, both should co exist well, but when man destroys the riverine environment they way he has done, there are occasional cases of collateral damage in the greater good of more severly threatened species, such as Spring Salmon, which a lot more threatened than cormorants.
All this is a moot point in many ways, as section 42's are issued for river systems where significant damage has been shown as taking place, and once issued, I would imagine it is very difficult enforce the actual numbers culled.
For completness the slaney report is at this link, http://www.slaneyrivertrust.ie/Files/RiverSlaneyCormorants2005Oct.pdf
I cannot vouch for its accuracy but I can vouch for what I have seen with my own eyes.
I wish river systems did not have stocks of gentically unique Salmonids in such a perilous state that the culling of cormorants is even mentioned but que sera.

Birdnuts

bibio wrote: »

Just to clarify my last post as some of the replies seem to miss my point.
I'm not advocating a cull, but rather pointing out there is strong argument for one.
All things being equal there should be no need to consider any cull of Cormorants, but on certain river systems in Ireland that have not recovered from the ravages of pollution, drift netting, poaching, water abstraction et al, Salmonid species are barely hanging on, and are signiifncaty below their minimum escapement target to sustain a population.
I'm not saying cull cormorants, what I am saying is that on these rivers, such as the Slaney, which is unique for its unique multi sea winter salmon run, that some sort of cull, scare methods, should be considered during the smolt run. I have seen with my own eyes on many, many occasions, groups of between two and five cormorants fishing in groups, every half mile or so from Oilgate up to Bunclody, make no mistake the predation during this period is significant.
This isnt as black and white, as Fish V Cormorant, both should co exist well, but when man destroys the riverine environment they way he has done, there are occasional cases of collateral damage in the greater good of more severly threatened species, such as Spring Salmon, which a lot more threatened than cormorants.
All this is a moot point in many ways, as section 42's are issued for river systems where significant damage has been shown as taking place, and once issued, I would imagine it is very difficult enforce the actual numbers culled.
For completness the slaney report is at this link, http://www.slaneyrivertrust.ie/Files/RiverSlaneyCormorants2005Oct.pdf
I cannot vouch for its accuracy but I can vouch for what I have seen with my own eyes.
I wish river systems did not have stocks of gentically unique Salmonids in such a perilous state that the culling of cormorants is even mentioned but que sera.

What is the SE fisheries board position on this??

doctor evil

fodda wrote: »

Why are you queering why a wild bird cant eat its natural food and want to have it culled? Its not affecting livestock or is it?

No Wild Cats in Ireland, only kept stray and feral. There are WC in Scotland that are under mega threat from inbreeding with the domestic cat and from diseases such as FIV and Feline Leukemia.

4gun

I'll explain my earlier post on the greed of it
Talking about culling a specific species so there will be more fish stocks the birds have a greater right to the fish than any man or organisation ..they are essential for its survival, people on the other hand have a choice and at that we only fish or hunt as a pastime..we a re not totally dependant on it..if fish stock are low it not because there are too many being lost to natural predition by because of years of commercial over fishing by man.
to suggest removing these birds from a river system just so there will be more fish to catch is greedy..why not stop fihing it for a few years and let the river recover naturally

bibio

4Gun,

The Slaney has ben closed for salmon fishing for quite a few years now and stocks continue to fall, I feel the stock on this river went over a tipping point, and needs all the help it can. If this means dissuading some cormorants from doing what comes naturally to them, during the smolt run, then so be it. Obviously there are bigger fish to fry (excuse the pun) in regards to saving the stock, such as abstraction, pollution, poaching et al. Once the mighty spring salmon disappears form this river, it is gone forever. Forever is a long time.
Rgds
Bibio

bibio

Just to throw some more petrol on the fire, so to speak, in a related matter. What are peoples opinion on the fact the State in the guise of the Western regional fisheires board, AKA IFI western region, has a license to shoot seals that venture up to the Galway Weir.
BTW I'm not for or against, just interested in the context of the debate about Cormorant culling, what views were on Seal culling on Salmon fisheries by the State. Also worth noting that I'm not aware of any indviduals or fishery operators other than the state that can cull seals.
Rgds
Bibio

Birdnuts

bibio wrote: »

Just to throw some more petrol on the fire, so to speak, in a related matter. What are peoples opinion on the fact the State in the guise of the Western regional fisheires board, AKA IFI western region, has a license to shoot seals that venture up to the Galway Weir.
BTW I'm not for or against, just interested in the context of the debate about Cormorant culling, what views were on Seal culling on Salmon fisheries by the State. Also worth noting that I'm not aware of any indviduals or fishery operators other than the state that can cull seals.
Rgds
Bibio

Like Cormorants these licenses are occasionally granted when criteria are met(presumbly based on advice from their own experts or national academia) - I have no problem with that since these deceisons are based on science as opposed to misplaced hysteria, ignorance or old wives tales(not having a go at anyone here just pointing out what often emerges around such debates eg. "I saw a heron swallow a trout once so that must mean all herons are evil and are the main cause of game fishery collapses!!:rolleyes:":(

PS: I'm still wondering what the position of the SE RFB is as regards the Slaney situation??

MACT1RE

Feargal as Luimneach wrote: »

I saw me ten Little eejits last week in Wexford. I saw them ate three fish. That be too many I'd say. They should be culled now......

No need to be obnoxious. You’re only displaying your own ignorance and prejudices posting crap like that.

fodda

bibio wrote: »

4Gun,

The Slaney has ben closed for salmon fishing for quite a few years now and stocks continue to fall, I feel the stock on this river went over a tipping point, and needs all the help it can. If this means dissuading some cormorants from doing what comes naturally to them, during the smolt run, then so be it. Obviously there are bigger fish to fry (excuse the pun) in regards to saving the stock, such as abstraction, pollution, poaching et al. Once the mighty spring salmon disappears form this river, it is gone forever. Forever is a long time.
Rgds
Bibio

In the UK the Thames and other rivers had been devoid of salmon and other animals for many many years due to many factors which one was chronic pollution. They had to cull no bird or animal or even fish to get the salmon and other fish/animals to return which they have in ever stronger numbers over the past 20 years.

So any argument for a bit of shooting is just pure fantasy:)

Salmon disapeared in 1833 and the first one returned in 1974

Feargal as Luimneach

MACT1RE wrote: »

No need to be obnoxious. You’re only displaying your own ignorance and prejudices posting crap like that.

I was being sarcastic..........

johngalway

I'm locking this thread to prevent it running downhill any faster than it is.

In the mean time I'm going to contact N&BW to give them first crack at wanting it or not, then angling. If we have no takers it stays locked as it was a tenuous hunting post in the first place and not at all at this stage.

johngalway

Neither N&BW nor Angling wanted this thread. So it's going to remain locked.