-
[QUOTE=toomanycasts;517118]If they are native they should be there. Maybe the fish aren't gone. You might need to adapt your approach. Sounds like when people have an unhealthy fear of snakes and act irrationally.[/QUOTE]
Sure that would be fine if the natural predators were proportionally brought back also.
What the "restore the species groupies" doesn't get is that it took 100s if not 1000s of years for a natural balance to be achieved. When was the last time you saw a wolf or a fox?
When we first move to the Hamburg area of Lexington in 1995 we used to have a fox that visited for a day or two every 6 weeks and then moved on. As the development persisted he quit visiting. Now we have more tree rats than we can feed. Nature over time achieves balance. Man can muddle along and restore an out of balance species here and there.
-
Your being rediculous. If a land owner wants to remove an otter, or other nuisance from a pond he or she dug is their prerogative. But in public water is a different story. Especially a larger creek,river, or lake. Those other species are gone because the environment couldn't support them any more or evolution got em. And it's the grey wolf and red wolf in Kentucky that suffered extinction because of
man.
-
Kumbaya me Lord Kumbaya, LOL....
-
I heard tree rats sneak in homes and steal babies in hopes of finding the next rat king. It's true I read it on the internet
-
[QUOTE=mhall;517115]Creek you are waisting your time he is on some personal quest to discount the theory that Otters are bad for our waterways. You and I need to slap some sense into him, LOL...
He won't listen to me either......;)[/QUOTE]
Nope, no personal quest. Had no idea what the data would indicate. Just wanted to see some real data not the bs that has been flying around here. The data that I've seen shows that you are partially correct: in cases where you have a small contained area, otters can be a problem. I see no indication that they'll eat their weight in fish every day or that they can devistate any place they are present. Show me some real data to back up your hypothesis and I'll happily change my opinion.
Andrew
-
[QUOTE=Colbyt;517121]Sure that would be fine if the natural predators were proportionally brought back also.
What the "restore the species groupies" doesn't get is that it took 100s if not 1000s of years for a natural balance to be achieved. When was the last time you saw a wolf or a fox?
When we first move to the Hamburg area of Lexington in 1995 we used to have a fox that visited for a day or two every 6 weeks and then moved on. As the development persisted he quit visiting. Now we have more tree rats than we can feed. Nature over time achieves balance. Man can muddle along and restore an out of balance species here and there.[/QUOTE]
Get away from the city area and foxes are not that uncommon. See several every year. No wolves, but there are plenty of coyotes around.
Andrew
-
[QUOTE=toomanycasts;517124]I heard tree rats sneak in homes and steal babies in hopes of finding the next rat king. It's true I read it on the internet[/QUOTE]
"Don't believe everything that you read on the internet, some of it is made up." Abe Lincoln.
:p
-
[QUOTE=apb;517128]"Don't believe everything that you read on the internet, some of it is made up." Abe Lincoln.
:p[/QUOTE]
Honest Abe, great president; better vampire slayer
-
[QUOTE=apb;517126]Nope, no personal quest. Had no idea what the data would indicate. Just wanted to see some real data not the bs that has been flying around here. The data that I've seen shows that you are partially correct: in cases where you have a small contained area, otters can be a problem. I see no indication that they'll eat their weight in fish every day or that they can devistate any place they are present. Show me some real data to back up your hypothesis and I'll happily change my opinion.
Andrew[/QUOTE]
Yes sir Mr Spock. That BS you posted doesn't disprove or prove anything. I know what I've observed in the field and stand behind what I believe and thats my right to do so.
-
[QUOTE=mhall;517131]Yes sir Mr Spock. That BS you posted doesn't disprove or prove anything. I know what I've observed in the field and stand behind what I believe and thats my right to do so.[/QUOTE]
You certainly have the right to believe anything that you want. If you expect anyone to take you seriously you have to actually present solid data. Anecdotal evidence and hyperbol will not go very far in that regard. Like I said, provide some solid evidence and I'll have no problem changing my views on the subject.
Andrew
-
[QUOTE=apb;517138]You certainly have the right to believe anything that you want. If you expect anyone to take you seriously you have to actually present solid data. Anecdotal evidence and hyperbol will not go very far in that regard. Like I said, provide some solid evidence and I'll have no problem changing my views on the subject.
Andrew[/QUOTE]
Have you considered there may not be any data per say? We have DNR and Conservation officers that go out and make reports on private properties of Otters raping ponds. That was told to me personally by a DNR guy in Indiana. Do I need to get a written signed report for you or did I just make that up, maybe I'm lieing because you know me I do that alot.
Even on Kentucky Afield on one of their call in shows the officers recognized that they can be very problomatic in small waters and in given geographic locations.
Maybe it hasn't went on long enough yet for it to come to light. Maybe the KDFW doesn't want to admit a mistake?
Anybody can look up a wikipedia type thing about Otters. That doesn't mean they can't be a problem. I will do some research and see if there is any way to find documentation of reports taken by CO's about said claims.
Until then you can use words like anecdotal and hyperbol to make me look like an unedumucated redneck I suppose, that certainly solidifies your position, lol.
-
Oh and it's Hyperbole with an E at least according to the internet, LOL.......
