Jump to content
  • Announcements

    PLEASE NOTE THAT THE NBN MOBILE APP IS CURRENTLY NOT WORKING

Closed Season Decision In The Spring 2019.


Recommended Posts

I once saw in a Victorian recipe book a recipe for wild goose, it was a while ago but here we go.

buy vegetables onions leeks carrots potatoes. Spread news paper on the kitchen table.

Go and dig a hole in the garden.

Peel all the veg onto the news paper, place the goose on the paper wrap it up and place into

the previously dug hole in the garden, fill in the hole.

Take all the peeled veg and make soup.

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 74
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I love the closed season, no fishing kit spread out all over moorings. No moorings blocked off. No rods half way across the rivers. No grumpy faces on the riverbanks. I know most fisherpeople are cons

Sorry but I hope it stays. Try mooring at the likes of Loddon or Rockland in season. They are supposed to shift but never do. There are fishing platforms dotted about but I've yet to see one used. 

As we have been round this argument several times before I will  suggest we concentrate more on whether or not the closed fishing season is a good thing. It is well documented that I believe the otter

Posted Images

1 hour ago, MauriceMynah said:

Yes WW your points make perfect sense to me, but I do see some "howevers" in there.

Had otters naturally reinhabited the broads, I would agree, but they were not. they were re-introduced by man. Once again, man sticks his muddy little oar in and changes things.

It is possible... no probable … that the wildfowl population is returning to a level that it should have been all along and had we not polluted the rivers thus removing the otters we would never have had the high populations you and I have enjoyed over the years.

The "balance of nature" is a myth. Logic tells me it has to be. or at least if not a myth a paradox.   Is man natural? if so, everything mankind does is part of the balance. if not then everything it does erodes that balance. if it tries to restore that balance, it forces the balance in a direction it was not going.

If anyone wishes to restore the balance of nature, there is only one animal that needs a total cull, and I'll leave you to work out which one that is. :) (Clue... it isn't the bloody otter!)

Man and his farm chemicals were responsible for the loss of otters (along with many other species) in the UK.  Is it not reasonable that they should have been given a helping hand ?

We hear a lot about harmful 'introduced ' species from Natural England, the Environment Agency and others, yet we hear almost nothing about the vicious North American Mink.

Could that be because many of today's 'professional tree huggers' were involved in their illegal release from fur farms ??

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Poppy said:

Man and his farm chemicals were responsible for the loss of otters (along with many other species) in the UK.  Is it not reasonable that they should have been given a helping hand ?

Oh, I thought man and his boating loos and boat drains going into the river played a part, I also thought man and his hunting with otter hounds played another part, not to mention man as a gamekeeper, and man as protecting his fisheries. Man treating otters as vermin probably didn't help either. The bottom line is that it was man's doing that the otter left the broads.

That I don't deny, but we seem to be avoiding one or two questions here. The Norfolk broadland economy relies heavily on tourism. Which will better enhance this, the shy rarely seen otter or the (used to be) oft seen ducks for kiddywinks to feed?

Do anglers come because they enjoy the surfeit of fish, or to see the delights of half eaten fish on the river banks?

Ok, loaded questions but questions never the less.

14 minutes ago, Poppy said:

We hear a lot about harmful 'introduced ' species from Natural England, the Environment Agency and others, yet we hear almost nothing about the vicious North American Mink. 

Could that be because many of today's 'professional tree huggers' were involved in their illegal release from fur farms ??

Nice to agree with you there, I do wonder about that. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, MauriceMynah said:

Oh, I thought man and his boating loos and boat drains going into the river played a part, I also thought man and his hunting with otter hounds played another part, not to mention man as a gamekeeper, and man as protecting his fisheries. Man treating otters as vermin probably didn't help either. The bottom line is that it was man's doing that the otter left the broads.

That I don't deny, but we seem to be avoiding one or two questions here. The Norfolk broadland economy relies heavily on tourism. Which will better enhance this, the shy rarely seen otter or the (used to be) oft seen ducks for kiddywinks to feed?

Do anglers come because they enjoy the surfeit of fish, or to see the delights of half eaten fish on the river banks?

 

I regularly see otters on the Broads - but then my mode of travel is almost silent - and relatively slower than that of many visitors :default_norty:

You (and others) may find this learned research of interest.

https://www.sheffield.ac.uk/polopoly_fs/1.733119!/file/Otters_the_facts_v9_Format.pdf

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Poppy, I've just read that article (from your link) and indeed it was very interesting. I can understand how the concept that the Broadland otter population was stopped by farmers chemicals but I would argue (I always do)  that as most of the broadland farming is cattle. rather than grain or sheep, the statistics might be misleading. I bring peoples attention to my using the words "Most" and "Might".

We can all be guilty of cherry picking the articles we disregard or put our faith in, probably me more than most so it will not surprise you that the article has not changed my opinions about the broadland otters. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Don't know, I've never tried it, but someone on the forum may have... I'm told that 'goose fat' makes the best roast potatoes though!... :10_wink:
Wild goose is beautiful to eat I have had lots, I'm my opinion they are also the most challenging & best shooting going. Pinkfeet are the best followed closely by graylags. Cook like braising steak with lots of onions.
Canada geese stuff with a orange and a brick, roast for 2 hours chuck the goose and eat the brick.

Sent from the Norfolk Broads Network mobile app

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

MM - I think you guilty of not reading the article correctly or perhaps no not wishing to understand - with respect!

Whilst much of Broadland farming is indeed cattle based and you must not discount the impact of slurry, have you really forgotten that the bulk of water in the Broadland system, does not start in Broadland itself but in the enormous catchment systems of the rivers concerned - the Wensum rises well to the west of Dereham, the Waveney near Redgrave to the west of Diss and the Bure up around Aylsham? Cattle country? I think not!!

Over the last few years the EA and the BA have been looking at the impact of each of the basins, as what happens a long long way from Broadland, has and indeed still affects the waters this end.

You are of course entitled to your view that the "evidence" of this report is selective - but surely it should carry more weight than the unscientific "evidence" of the uncorroborated sightings of a few, amateur, "naturalists". Surely it is just as important to take into account the view, upheld by the various serious anglers, that the fish stocks in Broadland continue to improve, despite all the scientific evidence to suggest the otters still eat, mostly fish!

It is also foolish to ignore the impact of mink, although in that respect, I am pleased to say they do still struggle to get a foothold up here on the Northern Broads - I am not sure about Southern Rivers where in the past they have been much more prolific. I wonder whether PW was any comment on this - seen lots of ladies recently down there in fur coats JM?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, marshman said:

but surely it should carry more weight than the unscientific "evidence" of the uncorroborated sightings of a few, amateur, "naturalists".

Could you kindly modify your language? This is an honest forum discussion about matters which concern those of us who are worried about what we see around us. We don't have to be experts to notice the things that are changing on the Broads. Some good, but an awful lot bad. We also have the the right to express those concerns without being talked down, in such an aggressive manner. 

 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, marshman said:

MM - I think you guilty of not reading the article correctly or perhaps no not wishing to understand - with respect!

Whilst much of Broadland farming is indeed cattle based and you must not discount the impact of slurry, have you really forgotten that the bulk of water in the Broadland system, does not start in Broadland itself but in the enormous catchment systems of the rivers concerned - the Wensum rises well to the west of Dereham, the Waveney near Redgrave to the west of Diss and the Bure up around Aylsham? Cattle country? I think not!!

Over the last few years the EA and the BA have been looking at the impact of each of the basins, as what happens a long long way from Broadland, has and indeed still affects the waters this end.

You are of course entitled to your view that the "evidence" of this report is selective - but surely it should carry more weight than the unscientific "evidence" of the uncorroborated sightings of a few, amateur, "naturalists". Surely it is just as important to take into account the view, upheld by the various serious anglers, that the fish stocks in Broadland continue to improve, despite all the scientific evidence to suggest the otters still eat, mostly fish!

It is also foolish to ignore the impact of mink, although in that respect, I am pleased to say they do still struggle to get a foothold up here on the Northern Broads - I am not sure about Southern Rivers where in the past they have been much more prolific. I wonder whether PW was any comment on this - seen lots of ladies recently down there in fur coats JM?

Haven't seen a mink in years now, however I do see marsh harriers attacking ground nesting birds like lapwings, during the winter we have sixty or more cormorants on Oulton Broad gobbling up the fish stocks,  whilst I'm on the bank at night I both see and hear fox rummaging through nesting areas and of course I see quite a few otters. What I don't see many of is duck, lapwings, moorhens, grebes and coots.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Plenty of grebe up north - probably one of the more plentiful I must admit. There are also quite a few duck,certainly where there are boats, gobbling up bread!

Very very glad to hear about the mink - there is some little, unverified, evidence that the mink and otter do not get on too well!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, marshman said:

Very very glad to hear about the mink - there is some little, unverified, evidence that the mink and otter do not get on too well!

I can't believe you have just said that. Surely that is not the uncorroborated evidence of an amateur naturalist, is it?

Good night all!

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, marshman said:

MM - I think you guilty of not reading the article correctly or perhaps no not wishing to understand - with respect!

Or perhaps not reading it with rose tinted glasses (With equal respect).

11 hours ago, marshman said:

Whilst much of Broadland farming is indeed cattle based and you must not discount the impact of slurry, have you really forgotten that the bulk of water in the Broadland system, does not start in Broadland itself but in the enormous catchment systems of the rivers concerned

One of the differences between the resident and the frequent visitor to the Broads is the depth of knowledge one has of the area. Forgotten? No! Was unaware of? sadly, yes.

11 hours ago, marshman said:

You are of course entitled to your view that the "evidence" of this report is selective

Thank you. That is my view of the vast majority of reports. Somebody has asked for them, those that do not support the requesters view tend not to be published. If the requester is neutral in the subject the report will reflect the view of the majority of the investigators for that report. Is that a cynical view or that of a realist?

11 hours ago, marshman said:

but surely it should carry more weight than the unscientific "evidence" of the uncorroborated sightings of a few, amateur, "naturalists".

Another difference between the resident and the frequent visitor to the Broads is that gradual changes are more noticeable to the visitor. I have witnessed the decline in numbers of wildfowl. I have to believe what I see. Not hearsay, not rumours but that which my very own two peepers tell me.

 

12 hours ago, marshman said:

Surely it is just as important to take into account the view, upheld by the various serious anglers, that the fish stocks in Broadland continue to improve, despite all the scientific evidence to suggest the otters still eat, mostly fish!

I see little difference between the "Amateur naturalist" and the "Serious angler" or might they be the "Serious naturalists" and "Amateur angler". Perhaps we'd be better to refer to them as "Naturalists" and "Anglers". Either way I have been talking tongue in cheek when I write of fish stocks. … may I add that a total cull of mankind was also tongue in cheek!

 

12 hours ago, marshman said:

It is also foolish to ignore the impact of mink, although in that respect, I am pleased to say they do still struggle to get a foothold up here on the Northern Broads - I am not sure about Southern Rivers where in the past they have been much more prolific. I wonder whether PW was any comment on this - seen lots of ladies recently down there in fur coats JM?

I haven't.  

That's probably why I haven't mentioned them.

As I understand it, whilst they are about , they're not in great numbers either north or south. They need to be got rid of anyway.

Nice to see we are both tongue in cheek sometimes.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, marshman said:

Plenty of grebe up north - probably one of the more plentiful I must admit. There are also quite a few duck,certainly where there are boats, gobbling up bread!

Very very glad to hear about the mink - there is some little, unverified, evidence that the mink and otter do not get on too well!

"It used to be thought that mink displaced otters and were part of the reason for the otters’ decline. However, this is now thought not to be true, and although there is evidence that sometimes otters will actually kill mink, mink and otters co-exist throughout Norfolk. "...... " Mink also hunt water birds, such as moorhen and ducks, and a noticeable decline in numbers of birds may indicate that mink are in the area. Mink are aggressive predators and will overkill prey. They can cause significant damage to housed or penned game birds or poultry by killing large numbers, far more than they can eat, and they may also damage fish stocks. "

https://www.norfolkwildlifetrust.org.uk/wildlife-in-norfolk/species-explorer/mammals/american-mink

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

At one time the Broads was Britain's premiere pike fishery. Pike eat fish, lots of them, regretfully the pike population on the Broads has plummeted thus lots of fish aren't being eaten, at least by pike! At one time the Broads eel population was also large and eels eat spawn by the bushel, however the eel population has also crashed.  The balance of nature is ever changing! I'm not writing as an expert, just someone who sees what's going on around him!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Poppy said:

"It used to be thought that mink displaced otters and were part of the reason for the otters’ decline. However, this is now thought not to be true, and although there is evidence that sometimes otters will actually kill mink, mink and otters co-exist throughout Norfolk. "...... " Mink also hunt water birds, such as moorhen and ducks, and a noticeable decline in numbers of birds may indicate that mink are in the area. Mink are aggressive predators and will overkill prey. They can cause significant damage to housed or penned game birds or poultry by killing large numbers, far more than they can eat, and they may also damage fish stocks. "

https://www.norfolkwildlifetrust.org.uk/wildlife-in-norfolk/species-explorer/mammals/american-mink

Seems to me that what applies to mink also applies to otters, perhaps even more so. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JennyMorgan said:

At one time the Broads was Britain's premiere pike fishery. Pike eat fish, lots of them, regretfully the pike population on the Broads has plummeted thus lots of fish aren't being eaten, at least by pike! At one time the Broads eel population was also large and eels eat spawn by the bushel, however the eel population has also crashed.  The balance of nature is ever changing! I'm not writing as an expert, just someone who sees what's going on around him!

Otters? Maybe they played a small part. I would also like to know what is the effect of poor handling of captured fish by inexperienced anglers.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Poppy said:

Otters? Maybe they played a small part. I would also like to know what is the effect of poor handling of captured fish by inexperienced anglers.

Poor angling technique has been around for many years. Remember the "Jardine snap tackle"? A horrible piece of kit !

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MauriceMynah said:

Kites? Have we got Kites too? Oh bloody hell …  What with Pike, Otters, Heron, Mink, Marsh Harriers and now Red Kites, those poor little ducklings don't stand a chance.

And bowthrusters, don't forget the bowthrusters.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

There have been a lot of excellent posts on this thread, but one thing people must definitely NOT do, and that`s to dismiss the "unquallified amatuer" as very often, and quoting MM, "official reports" are often required to prove a personal theory, and if those reports DON`T support that theory, they get ignored, swept aside, or even destroyed by those with a personal agenda. The unquallified amatuer however has no financial gain, and devotes free time to study a subject and give an "unbiased" report. It`s also worth remembering that often, when an "amatuer" get`s involved in something, because they have nothing to gain, they lose nothing when giving an honest answer.  I`m not saying that every amatuer is perfect, but i`ve had a serious mistrust of reports on behalf of authority for many years.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Every one posting on this thread will have unconscious bias towards one direction or another, this is often reflected in their post. The great thing about this thread is the ability to read about it from all sides to help you form your own opinions. Interestingly today’s facts are often condemned to the waste bin in future years.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the original law is in this day and age is outdated. This law came about when match catches were thrown up the bank and coarse fish were taken regularly and as contrast to some beliefs didn't take into consideration bank-side flora and fauna. We find ourselves in a disparate situation where canals and lakes can be fished and rivers can't, some clubs impose self regulating close season rules and other clubs as and when the Carp (not other species!) are spawning. Add to this the fact that some species (Perch and Pike plus others) spawn outside the current close season, makes a real mockery of it all.

My personal preference would be a complete lifting of the law (being selfish and an angler) but if it were to be upheld then I would also want to see it benefit the fish and not the angler (or angling industry), meaning specific rules for certain species and no preference of water body type.

Also ask yourself this question specifically for the Broads:- Do you think boats do more damage to spawning areas than anglers? I know this has been mentioned before but for context fish always spawn in shallower weeded areas to lay their eggs, and in the main the Broads are fished away from these areas. If a boat was move through these waters when mooring or whatever how many eggs would be swept away...just a thought!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • NBN Mobile App


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

For details of our Guidelines, please take a look at the Terms of Use here.