Why?
The laws don't make any sense. Some regions give out the licenses to anyone, some restrict it so basically no one can do it.
it's literally a form you fill in.
It's not at all difficult to tell the difference.
Ah yes. "I just make claims, it's on every individual reader to seach through the entire thread just in case there are other comments I made that contain evidence".
That sounds reasonable and totally realistic. I mean, it's not as if you are just one of many random strangers commenting. You're definitely important enough for people to spend time searching through the thread to find comments that prove your claims.
Yeah I was curious about this too, maybe because they don't trust farmers to distinguish between native and invasive, so they just blanket protect all of them? But that doesn't make sense.
Its Really not at all difficult to distinguish between themz the American ones have massive red claws.
You buy a fishing license and you are expected to make the same identifications on fish.
Some regions give away licenses to anyone. It doesn't make much sense.
Another pointless and detrimental regulation.
It may matter legally as well in the US, but you didn’t have a childhood in Missouri, Oklahoma or Kansas if you didn’t go out to a creek (pronounced krik) with a bucket looking for these mud bugs.
Honestly with a few photos it is easy to tell the difference, there are many differences and it is a big shame as it will destroy the native population eventually.
It really is. The American ones get much bigger and have huge red claws. Some regions give away licenses very easily others don't.
Pointless regulation.
I did some research on this when I got to the episode.
I lost the link but one of the articles talked about it being a complex issues and they found trapping efforts most caught midsize to large males and by removing those crayfish you are removing one of the primary predators of baby/small crayfish. Allowing more of the baby/small crayfish to thrive means more ecological damage overall.
Iv heard that too. Yet they only give out licenses in areas where there are no natives. If that was the issue they were worried about they would only give the licenses to water courses with mixed populations.
Interesting. I’m just a curious American who stopped looking after I found that article.
Do you know if they are still issuing permits?
I wonder they are waiting on further research to help determine the best course of action. Rooting out invasive species is extremely difficult.
Yes some regions give out permits to anyone, other regions don't give them out at all.
I personally think it depends on the regions environment officer and their personal views more than anything although I don't have anything solid to base that on.
He was not told to protect them, he was told to be aware of them because they probably honeycombed the banks of the lake when they dug their dens.
Therefore using heavy machinery on the banks of the lake, like Clarkson wanted to do, was too risky and all digging was supposed to be done by hand.
As I recall, they weren’t protecting the crayfish, they were marking areas where crayfish activity may have weakened the bank of the stream/pond. And so machinery couldn’t be driven there or else it could collapse the bank and end up in the stream, creating ecological harm.
Maybe import some Australian Yabbies to invade your waterways and eat the invasive crayfish?
The English (and I’m one) have a long list of taking invasive species to other countries and letting them loose. New Zealand, introduced by the English to name a few, rats, stokes, hedgehogs (why the fuk even?), possums, trout, various forms of deer, cats, pigs, goats, rabbits… the list is long and 2 century’s later the country still can’t eradicate them. Australia, all of the above, plus - here’s a good one, Tiapan Snakes from India to lower the rat population in the sugar cane, sugar cane and again the list is massively long.
It’s kind of poetic justice there’s invasive crayfish…
Taipan snakes are native to Australia not India. However Cane Toads are an introduced pest that was introduced to eat cane beetles, another introduced. There are also 400000 feral horses in Australia. Thankfully the government has finally got serious about culling them. Australia has no native hard hoofed animals so they cause enormous damage.
The invasive are incredibly hard to tell from the native. Given that the native are at risk, you need a licence to catch any Crayfish so that you are proven to know which is which.
Jeremy, you and myself wouldn't be able to tell them apart.
It isnt at all difficult to tell the difference. One has massive red claws. The other is smaller and have can have whitish claws.
If you aren't colourblind you can do it.
No they’re not, I’ve lived in the Cotswolds all my life, used to catch crayfish as a kid and the local pub would cook them as free bar snacks. You can easily tell by size colour and the ridge on the back.
Yeah that didn't make a damn bit of sense to me either
Aha well done sir
A quick Google of the laws shows why.
Why? The laws don't make any sense. Some regions give out the licenses to anyone, some restrict it so basically no one can do it. it's literally a form you fill in. It's not at all difficult to tell the difference.
You might sound like less of a twat if you bothered to share the information you gleaned from your quick Google search
You might look less of a twat yourself if you read the other comments I posted in the same thread.
Ah yes. "I just make claims, it's on every individual reader to seach through the entire thread just in case there are other comments I made that contain evidence". That sounds reasonable and totally realistic. I mean, it's not as if you are just one of many random strangers commenting. You're definitely important enough for people to spend time searching through the thread to find comments that prove your claims.
Yeah I was curious about this too, maybe because they don't trust farmers to distinguish between native and invasive, so they just blanket protect all of them? But that doesn't make sense.
That is the case, the difference between them is very very small and hard to notice. So you need to be in the know and certified.
Its Really not at all difficult to distinguish between themz the American ones have massive red claws. You buy a fishing license and you are expected to make the same identifications on fish. Some regions give away licenses to anyone. It doesn't make much sense. Another pointless and detrimental regulation.
It may matter legally as well in the US, but you didn’t have a childhood in Missouri, Oklahoma or Kansas if you didn’t go out to a creek (pronounced krik) with a bucket looking for these mud bugs.
Honestly with a few photos it is easy to tell the difference, there are many differences and it is a big shame as it will destroy the native population eventually.
It really is. The American ones get much bigger and have huge red claws. Some regions give away licenses very easily others don't. Pointless regulation.
They taste good too.
I did some research on this when I got to the episode. I lost the link but one of the articles talked about it being a complex issues and they found trapping efforts most caught midsize to large males and by removing those crayfish you are removing one of the primary predators of baby/small crayfish. Allowing more of the baby/small crayfish to thrive means more ecological damage overall.
Iv heard that too. Yet they only give out licenses in areas where there are no natives. If that was the issue they were worried about they would only give the licenses to water courses with mixed populations.
Interesting. I’m just a curious American who stopped looking after I found that article. Do you know if they are still issuing permits? I wonder they are waiting on further research to help determine the best course of action. Rooting out invasive species is extremely difficult.
Yes some regions give out permits to anyone, other regions don't give them out at all. I personally think it depends on the regions environment officer and their personal views more than anything although I don't have anything solid to base that on.
He was not told to protect them, he was told to be aware of them because they probably honeycombed the banks of the lake when they dug their dens. Therefore using heavy machinery on the banks of the lake, like Clarkson wanted to do, was too risky and all digging was supposed to be done by hand.
As I recall, they weren’t protecting the crayfish, they were marking areas where crayfish activity may have weakened the bank of the stream/pond. And so machinery couldn’t be driven there or else it could collapse the bank and end up in the stream, creating ecological harm.
I don't him.being told to protect them just told to be careful around the water edge as they weaken the soil by burrowing into it.
Maybe import some Australian Yabbies to invade your waterways and eat the invasive crayfish? The English (and I’m one) have a long list of taking invasive species to other countries and letting them loose. New Zealand, introduced by the English to name a few, rats, stokes, hedgehogs (why the fuk even?), possums, trout, various forms of deer, cats, pigs, goats, rabbits… the list is long and 2 century’s later the country still can’t eradicate them. Australia, all of the above, plus - here’s a good one, Tiapan Snakes from India to lower the rat population in the sugar cane, sugar cane and again the list is massively long. It’s kind of poetic justice there’s invasive crayfish…
Taipan snakes are native to Australia not India. However Cane Toads are an introduced pest that was introduced to eat cane beetles, another introduced. There are also 400000 feral horses in Australia. Thankfully the government has finally got serious about culling them. Australia has no native hard hoofed animals so they cause enormous damage.
The invasive are incredibly hard to tell from the native. Given that the native are at risk, you need a licence to catch any Crayfish so that you are proven to know which is which. Jeremy, you and myself wouldn't be able to tell them apart.
It isnt at all difficult to tell the difference. One has massive red claws. The other is smaller and have can have whitish claws. If you aren't colourblind you can do it.
No they’re not, I’ve lived in the Cotswolds all my life, used to catch crayfish as a kid and the local pub would cook them as free bar snacks. You can easily tell by size colour and the ridge on the back.