"Gill Passman" wrote in message
...

As both herons and comorants eat primarily fish I very much doubt that
approach would work unless you set up a pond of sacrificial fish and made
it a bit more tempting than those you are trying to preserve.....it's the
fish they want....

That was kinda my idea. I have no idea if it's a practical idea! But
sometimes even good ideas come out of brainstorming. Or maybe I should have
said out of ignorance (mine).

It has to be said when watching
herons around the lake at the place I used to work they tended to be solo
operators but I don't know if this is the norm - but might explain why
placing a fake heron sculpture also seems to work with a smaller pond....

I've heard that, too. A friend sent me a lovely heron sculpture which I put
by my vulnerable in-ground pond. Don't know if it's made a difference, but
I only have minnows and a few goldfish in there.

but my guess is you'd need an awful lot of these around a
lake/loch....We're going up there just after christmas...now I can't wait
to interrogate the owner on his policy with this...along with an estimate
of how many fish he loses to herons and what the cost implications
are....and Yep, once I find out I will report back to rec.ponds even if it
isn't moderated....

I'm interested in what you find out.

Gill
rec.pond lurker since Nov 2003 and very occassional poster - don't have a
pond at the moment just a great interest in them

Gail
rec.ponder since April 2003

Yea, we put a truck ooad of culls in there with the good prized koi,
and write cull on their backs in magic markers or hang little signs on
them if time permits. Heron and other predators are very smart and
understanding so they eat only those marked as culls! Why we even dig
separate ponds so they can be stocked with food quality fish for the
herons, and they are very well behaved as they stay only at those
ponds designated as fish for eating only.

sheeeeeeeeeesh

On Thu, 07 Dec 2006 20:18:39 GMT, "Gail Futoran"
wrote:

"Gill Passman" wrote in message
. ..

Ok...this whole question of dealing with herons got me thinking - of
course in a "back yard" pond using nets and water spray is an option (and
I don't think shooting the things would be an option in a residential
area - in fact I can pretty much imagine what would happen) but I wondered
what would happen if the pond was much larger or even a lake/loch...and if
there was a commercial side to it. Obviously if fish are being raised on a
commercial basis having a heron or any other predator taking fish becomes
an issue if too frequent. Now, I know nothing of the legality in the US
but thought I'd find out what happens on the trout farm where my Dad lives
up in Scotland (herons are as much of an issue over here as in the
US)....apparently the herons are tolerated as there is little that can be
done about them - get rid of one and another one turns up (bit like bad
pennies I guess)....but they do shoot at the cormorants - mainly to scare
rather than kill....

Gill

There's a suggestion I've often seen in gardening books and groups: If you
want to deter birds and rabbits from eating your desirable crops, plant
something they really like in another part of your garden and let them have
at it! They will still eat some of your desirable crops, but maybe if you
also have mild deterrence there, most of the damage will be done to the free
meal you offered them.

Anyway, for large backyard ponds and commercial operations, I wonder if that
kind of approach would work, or would you find yourself attracting ever
larger flocks of herons?

Gail
rec.ponder since April 2003

Its a myth that a heron owns or takes over a place. You may only see
one heron at a time in a small back yard pond byt on a pond of
sufificint size its not uncommon to see more than one.Just becaus
eherson are not seen during daylight hours does not mean they are not
out there at night time...they do a lot of their hunting at night when
your sleeping. Herons are plain sneaky.

On Thu, 07 Dec 2006 20:25:18 +0000, Gill Passman
wrote:




As both herons and comorants eat primarily fish I very much doubt that
approach would work unless you set up a pond of sacrificial fish and
made it a bit more tempting than those you are trying to
preserve.....it's the fish they want....It has to be said when watching
herons around the lake at the place I used to work they tended to be
solo operators but I don't know if this is the norm - but might explain
why placing a fake heron sculpture also seems to work with a smaller
pond....but my guess is you'd need an awful lot of these around a
lake/loch....We're going up there just after christmas...now I can't
wait to interrogate the owner on his policy with this...along with an
estimate of how many fish he loses to herons and what the cost
implications are....and Yep, once I find out I will report back to
rec.ponds even if it isn't moderated....

Gill
rec.pond lurker since Nov 2003 and very occassional poster - don't have
a pond at the moment just a great interest in them

Well here is a typical usenet group answer. Give up the smokes so yo
can enjoy your pond and fish longer.....now for my view. Smoke em if
ya got em, and waste the heron so your fish live longer and yu can
enjoy them. Fish don't have a choice if they want to become food for a
heron but a human does have the choice to choose.......

Like I posted previously. given sufficient realestate for herons, its
not uncommon to see more thanone. I can take you to place here where
they are literally lined up along the shorelines.

On Thu, 07 Dec 2006 21:07:30 +0000, Gill Passman
wrote:


Of course it is very difficult to tell one heron from another - they
look pretty much all the same to me (but don't tell this to the
politically correct crew that will say every bird is different - lol). I
guess I'm saying I've never seen more than one hunting in one location
at a time - and believe me working for a company with a strict non
smoking policy and needing to walk for one gave me more than ample
opportunity to observe the heron....

Gill
rec.pond lurker since Nov 2003 and very occassional poster - don't have
a pond at the moment just a great interest in them

Of course it is very difficult to tell one heron from another - they
look pretty much all the same to me (but don't tell this to the
politically correct crew that will say every bird is different - lol). I
guess I'm saying I've never seen more than one hunting in one location
at a time - and believe me working for a company with a strict non
smoking policy and needing to walk for one gave me more than ample
opportunity to observe the heron....

Gill
rec.pond lurker since Nov 2003 and very occassional poster - don't have
a pond at the moment just a great interest in them

Tristan wrote:

Well here is a typical usenet group answer. Give up the smokes so yo
can enjoy your pond and fish longer.....now for my view. Smoke em if
ya got em, and waste the heron so your fish live longer and yu can
enjoy them. Fish don't have a choice if they want to become food for a
heron but a human does have the choice to choose.......

LOL - actually I gave up the job as more detrimental to my health than
the fags....fags are next on the agenda (woops 18 months on).....and
some of the trout from that farm are currently residing in my
freezer....but I do miss watching the "wild fish" in the stream and lake
and the birds that came to prey on them. I guess the money issue comes
into play whether looking it commercially or as pets....when it comes to
pets we then look at our own attachment to these creatures...as I've
said I don't have a pond (yet) but I would be incredibly ****ed off if
I'd just spent £90 on a lovely, big, koi to see it become heron
fodder...but I couldn't shoot the heron - gun laws far stricter over
here so I would have to be going with other advice given....not only is
it down to gun laws but when your neighbour truly lives in your back
yard you just couldn't do it....woops there goes their cat - shame I'm a
bad shot (very extreme example)...

Like I posted previously. given sufficient realestate for herons, its
not uncommon to see more thanone. I can take you to place here where
they are literally lined up along the shorelines.

I am now greatly looking forward to putting these questions to the owner
of the fish farm in question (technically he is my step-brother but
without wandering too far off-topic it is not a relationship I want to
acknowledge as that and him neither).....I also am greatly interested in
how such a venture works.....maybe not technically ponds but hopefully a
subject of interest to us all....

Gill
rec.pond lurker since Nov 2003 and very occassional poster - don't have
a pond at the moment just a great interest in them - enjoying what is
now an on-topic discussion

"Gill Passman" wrote in message
...
As both herons and comorants eat primarily fish I very much doubt that
approach would work unless you set up a pond of sacrificial fish and made
it a bit more tempting than those you are trying to preserve.....it's the
fish they want...

And it can get expensive replacing the sacrificial fish. Plus there's still
nothing to keep them from going after your prize koi and goldfish. :-(

..It has to be said when watching
herons around the lake at the place I used to work they tended to be solo
operators but I don't know if this is the norm - but might explain why
placing a fake heron sculpture also seems to work with a smaller pond....

A heron looking for a mate will stop to check out the fake heron. Fake
herons are no guarantee to keep the real thing away. They do nothing for
King Fishers. I also witnessed a heron standing by one pond while another
worked the other pond next to it. For some of us nets are the only answer.

--
KL....
Frugal ponding since 1995.
rec.ponder since late 1996.
My Pond & Aquarium Pages:
http://tinyurl.com/9do58
~~~~ }((((* ~~~ }{{{{(ö ~~~~ }((((({*

So maybe we have got, through sensible discussion, to the point that in
a commercial or large lake environment maybe shooting/killing is the
best option...on a smaller scale then the sculptures, sprays, nets and
fences will be the best option but it isn't the way to go on a large
scale environment....

I think this a great example of how moderation could kill a good
discussion or how good moderation can allow this type of post to get
through and generate an intelligent conversation.....it is to be hoped
that the moderators on the proposed rec.ponds.moderated can see that
even if a post starts off as being inflammatory it is still valid....and
sometimes I can see that playing devil's advocate by taking an unpopular
stance can provoke debate and discussion....this IMO is a good
thing....and actually the point that the OP wanted to
prove/discuss/bring out into the open...

I look forward to intelligent posts on this subject such as we are now
getting from all concerned....it gives me hope that this can continue....

Gill

"Gill Passman" wrote in message
...

So maybe we have got, through sensible discussion, to the point that in a
commercial or large lake environment maybe shooting/killing is the best
option...on a smaller scale then the sculptures, sprays, nets and fences
will be the best option but it isn't the way to go on a large scale
environment....

This may be true but I have seen some large breeding establishments netted.
They don't care what it looks like as the fish and the environment are
what's most important. We chose the nets rather then having to constantly
watch the ponds to chase away the predators, or to kill them. Killing the
herons will do nothing for other predators you have in rural areas here in
the USA.

I think this a great example of how moderation could kill a good
discussion or how good moderation can allow this type of post to get
through and generate an intelligent conversation.....

That would be up to the moderators. If someone don't like someone else's
post they can ignore it and not reply. Or if the moderator can see it's
clearly designed to make people angry, they can refuse to pass it. Where to
draw the line - I have no idea.

it is to be hoped
that the moderators on the proposed rec.ponds.moderated can see that even
if a post starts off as being inflammatory it is still valid...

Right. Everyone else has the choice to reply or ignore such posts.

..and
sometimes I can see that playing devil's advocate by taking an unpopular
stance can provoke debate and discussion....

As long as it doesn't degenerate into personal attacks as you can see
flourish on this unmoderated group. If that's allowed, then having a
moderated group is a waste of time.

this IMO is a good
thing....and actually the point that the OP wanted to prove/discuss/bring
out into the open...

Nothing wrong with that........ the more ideas and questions the better in
my opinion.

I look forward to intelligent posts on this subject such as we are now
getting from all concerned....it gives me hope that this can continue....

It will be even better once the personal attacks are stopped and or removed
as I'm sure you would agree. ;-) Also, if those who constantly harass and
troll me are forced to keep one NYM, they can be killfiled.
--
KL....
Frugal ponding since 1995.
rec.ponder since late 1996.
My Pond & Aquarium Pages:
http://tinyurl.com/9do58
~~~~ }((((* ~~~ }{{{{(ö ~~~~ }((((({*



..

Köi-Lö wrote:

"Gill Passman" wrote in message
...


So maybe we have got, through sensible discussion, to the point that
in a commercial or large lake environment maybe shooting/killing is
the best option...on a smaller scale then the sculptures, sprays, nets
and fences will be the best option but it isn't the way to go on a
large scale environment....


This may be true but I have seen some large breeding establishments
netted. They don't care what it looks like as the fish and the
environment are what's most important. We chose the nets rather then
having to constantly watch the ponds to chase away the predators, or to
kill them. Killing the herons will do nothing for other predators you
have in rural areas here in the USA.

I think that point is academic....you cannot net a loch or lake that is
many acres in size....appearance in these sort of applications are not
really an issue...the commercial raising of fish either Koi for resale
or trout for human consumption is lucrative......Yes you can watch a
"small pond" but not something on a larger scale....

That would be up to the moderators. If someone don't like someone else's
post they can ignore it and not reply. Or if the moderator can see it's
clearly designed to make people angry, they can refuse to pass it.
Where to draw the line - I have no idea.

Sometimes being contraversial and in fact posting something you don't
necessarily hold as an opinion opens the world up to healthy debate. I
could post that I believe that fish fry are a valid food source for my
other fish and get flamed but it opens a debate as to how we see
this.....and it becomes an interesting on topic discussion....I might be
seen as being provoctive in saying this but I can always reserve the
right of playing devil's advocate in getting a healthy debate
going....sometimes doing this is good and it gets us all to examine our
beliefs and attitudes....I don't see in anyway that a moderated group
should lead to a supression of this sort of discussion - because it is
very valid and a dilemma that faces any type of fishkeeper....get rid of
the predator or sacrifice the fish - ever seen an angel with mollie
fry???? Ever seen a heron steal a prize fish???? where do we actually
draw our moral line.....discussing it is great and I am pleased that the
topic has been brought up...



It will be even better once the personal attacks are stopped and or
removed as I'm sure you would agree. ;-) Also, if those who constantly
harass and troll me are forced to keep one NYM, they can be killfiled.

I guess the whole thing is about everyone keeping one nym.....and a
valid reply to address....personal attacks will not happen on a
moderated group....and hey everyone can shift nyms and email addresses
at the drop of a hat as has been demonstrated by the mess on
rec.ponds....you can all also pretend to be one another....but the key
really is where is the point in playing these games if all you can do is
post on topic?????

yes, you can be traced but you can also filter and delete on your mail
application just the same way as you can on usenet...

Gill

"Gill Passman" wrote in message
...
Köi-Lö wrote:

"Gill Passman" wrote in message
...


So maybe we have got, through sensible discussion, to the point that in
a commercial or large lake environment maybe shooting/killing is the
best option...on a smaller scale then the sculptures, sprays, nets and
fences will be the best option but it isn't the way to go on a large
scale environment....


This may be true but I have seen some large breeding establishments
netted. They don't care what it looks like as the fish and the
environment are what's most important. We chose the nets rather then
having to constantly watch the ponds to chase away the predators, or to
kill them. Killing the herons will do nothing for other predators you
have in rural areas here in the USA.

I think that point is academic....you cannot net a loch or lake that is
many acres in size....

This is true. Not all the lakes they raise them in here are huge though.

appearance in these sort of applications are not
really an issue...the commercial raising of fish either Koi for resale or
trout for human consumption is lucrative......Yes you can watch a "small
pond" but not something on a larger scale....

I assure you you cannot watch a small pond either. You would go batty or
have to hire someone to sit there almost 24/7. :-) It just takes one trip
to the bathroom or the store for the local heron or water snake to gobble up
your best koi. Huge fish farms can afford to hire cheap labor to guard
their ponds. The rest of us don't have that option. Plus you shoot one and
another will almost immediately take it's place. We use to have 2 at the
ponds, one on the roof, one in a tree...... I kid you not! It was either
nets or give up on fish. And you already know we also had snapper turtles,
water shakes and huge bullfrogs to contend with.

That would be up to the moderators. If someone don't like someone else's
post they can ignore it and not reply. Or if the moderator can see it's
clearly designed to make people angry, they can refuse to pass it. Where
to draw the line - I have no idea.


Sometimes being contraversial and in fact posting something you don't
necessarily hold as an opinion opens the world up to healthy debate.

But too many times these debates degenerate into *personal* attacks or nasty
snipes at someone.

I
could post that I believe that fish fry are a valid food source for my
other fish and get flamed but it opens a debate as to how we see
this.....and it becomes an interesting on topic discussion....I might be
seen as being provoctive in saying this but I can always reserve the right
of playing devil's advocate in getting a healthy debate going....sometimes
doing this is good and it gets us all to examine our beliefs and
attitudes...

I agree.... but some NGs have those who can't control themselves and it
degenerates as mentioned above. They just have to go for someone's throat.

..I don't see in anyway that a moderated group
should lead to a supression of this sort of discussion - because it is
very valid and a dilemma that faces any type of fishkeeper....get rid of
the predator or sacrifice the fish - ever seen an angel with mollie
fry???? Ever seen a heron steal a prize fish????

YES! My own! Several hundred dollars worth before we netted the ponds.

where do we actually
draw our moral line.....discussing it is great and I am pleased that the
topic has been brought up...

It will be even better once the personal attacks are stopped and or
removed as I'm sure you would agree. ;-) Also, if those who constantly
harass and troll me are forced to keep one NYM, they can be killfiled.

I guess the whole thing is about everyone keeping one nym.....and a valid
reply to address....personal attacks will not happen on a moderated
group....and hey everyone can shift nyms and email addresses at the drop
of a hat as has been demonstrated by the mess on rec.ponds....you can all
also pretend to be one another....but the key really is where is the point
in playing these games if all you can do is post on topic?????

THERE YOU GO!!!!!!!!!!!! You got it lady! They're *all* stopped in their
tracks and the topic will be ponds again. :-)

yes, you can be traced but you can also filter and delete on your mail
application just the same way as you can on usenet...

You and several others know where my messages are coming from. You have my
legitimate ISP given e-mail address. Any of you can e-mail me any time you
want.
--
KL....
Frugal ponding since 1995.
rec.ponder since late 1996.
My Pond & Aquarium Pages:
http://tinyurl.com/9do58
~~~~ }((((* ~~~ }{{{{(ö ~~~~ }((((({*

"Gill Passman" wrote in message
...

So maybe we have got, through sensible discussion, to the point that in a
commercial or large lake environment maybe shooting/killing is the best
option...on a smaller scale then the sculptures, sprays, nets and fences
will be the best option but it isn't the way to go on a large scale
environment....

I think this a great example of how moderation could kill a good
discussion or how good moderation can allow this type of post to get
through and generate an intelligent conversation.....it is to be hoped
that the moderators on the proposed rec.ponds.moderated can see that even
if a post starts off as being inflammatory it is still valid....and
sometimes I can see that playing devil's advocate by taking an unpopular
stance can provoke debate and discussion....this IMO is a good
thing....and actually the point that the OP wanted to prove/discuss/bring
out into the open...

I look forward to intelligent posts on this subject such as we are now
getting from all concerned....it gives me hope that this can continue....

Gill

There should be an option for moderators to return a submitted post to the
OP with the suggestion that inflammatory or abusive language be removed and
the post resubmitted.

If you use the argument that *any* post can contain a useful gem that some
reasonable person down the line will help to morph into useful information,
then we might as well have no moderation whatsoever.

On the other hand, good moderation should actually encourage discussion,
because then people will feel confident that they can discuss what interests
them - even if their views are seen as silly or impractical by some -
without being personally attacked, for no reason other than that the
attacker knows he/she can get away with it - in an unmoderated group.

That's just my opinion, and is something that should be brought up, both pro
and con, during the RFD.

Gail
rec.ponder since April 2003

Gail Futoran wrote:



There should be an option for moderators to return a submitted post to the
OP with the suggestion that inflammatory or abusive language be removed and
the post resubmitted.

Agreed....it also means that a poster needs to use a valid email
address....I guess if they make a contraversial post with a fake address
then the post would just remain removed - and so it should be.

If you use the argument that *any* post can contain a useful gem that some
reasonable person down the line will help to morph into useful information,
then we might as well have no moderation whatsoever.

Not entirely what I was saying.....I guess what I am trying to say is
any "on-topic" post can generate an intelligent discussion - I'm
certainly not saying *any* post. Personally I would prefer it if a post
that deliberately sets out to inflame is returned to the submitter to
tone it down and ask the question in a way that would generate the
discussion....even if I strongly disagree with what is being
proposed...If a post is rejected subjectively (and without giving the OP
the opportunity to resubmit in acceptable language) then it would call
into question the neutral stance of the moderators - one example would
be whether bad advice should be moderated or not - OK there are times
when advice given is bad and this should be corrected on the newsgroup
by the posters - and moderators are also posters - and we also have to
understand that one person may feel the advice is bad but others will
have other experiences from following the same advice - healthy debate
without resorting to insults is exactly what a moderated group should be
about.


On the other hand, good moderation should actually encourage discussion,
because then people will feel confident that they can discuss what interests
them - even if their views are seen as silly or impractical by some -
without being personally attacked, for no reason other than that the
attacker knows he/she can get away with it - in an unmoderated group.

Agreed.....read this bit again after writing the above - I think we are
on the same wave length on this :-)

That's just my opinion, and is something that should be brought up, both pro
and con, during the RFD.

Gail
rec.ponder since April 2003

It is good that there are people willing to dedicate their time (long
term) to this project and you all have my support in your efforts

Gill

Jayne Kulikauskas wrote:
On Wed, 06 Dec 2006 00:33:07 +0000, Gill Passman wrote:


Exactly. Once the RFD is published, people will know exactly what
moderation policies and moderators are being proposed. At that time, I
recommend posing hypothetical questions to these moderators about how they
would deal with certain posts. You can either make posts up or find actual
posts. Not only does this help you understand how the proposed moderators
think, it gives them practice in making moderation decisions. The sort of
thing that "Tristan" has been posting will be quite useful for this
process. Thank you, Tristan. And thanks to you, Gill, for drawing
attention to this.


This IMO is an excellent idea.....

"Gill Passman" wrote in message
...
Gail Futoran wrote:

There should be an option for moderators to return a submitted post to
the OP with the suggestion that inflammatory or abusive language be
removed and the post resubmitted.

Agreed....it also means that a poster needs to use a valid email
address....I guess if they make a contraversial post with a fake address
then the post would just remain removed - and so it should be.

I use an invalid email address to post. It's obvious to any individual what
they need to do to send me email, but is that something we ought to be
asking moderators to do? I don't know the answer. I do know that if I
can't use a munged (I think that's the term) email addy when posting online
to minimize spam in my inbox, then I'm going to have to rethink posting
online, and I'd rather not do that.

If you use the argument that *any* post can contain a useful gem that
some reasonable person down the line will help to morph into useful
information, then we might as well have no moderation whatsoever.

Not entirely what I was saying.....I guess what I am trying to say is any
"on-topic" post can generate an intelligent discussion - I'm certainly not
saying *any* post. Personally I would prefer it if a post that
deliberately sets out to inflame is returned to the submitter to tone it
down and ask the question in a way that would generate the discussion....

Yes, that's my position, also.

even if I strongly disagree with what is being
proposed...If a post is rejected subjectively (and without giving the OP
the opportunity to resubmit in acceptable language) then it would call
into question the neutral stance of the moderators - one example would be
whether bad advice should be moderated or not -

Again, that's a topic that needs to be addressed in the RFD and discussed
until people are satisfied with the moderation guidelines.

OK there are times
when advice given is bad and this should be corrected on the newsgroup by
the posters - and moderators are also posters - and we also have to
understand that one person may feel the advice is bad but others will
have other experiences from following the same advice - healthy debate
without resorting to insults is exactly what a moderated group should be
about.

I agree. I probably have put it badly in other posts, resulting in the
erroneous charge that I was advocating moderator editing of others' posts,
but what I meant (and thought it was clear) was what you are saying.
Moderators are also posters, and if a moderator disagrees with something
someone posts, they should be able to post their opinion in a separate post.

On the other hand, good moderation should actually encourage discussion,
because then people will feel confident that they can discuss what
interests them - even if their views are seen as silly or impractical by
some - without being personally attacked, for no reason other than that
the attacker knows he/she can get away with it - in an unmoderated group.

Agreed.....read this bit again after writing the above - I think we are on
the same wave length on this :-)

Probably.

That's just my opinion, and is something that should be brought up, both
pro and con, during the RFD.

Gail
rec.ponder since April 2003

It is good that there are people willing to dedicate their time (long
term) to this project and you all have my support in your efforts

Gill

My very tired eyes thank you.

Gail