The Little Cormorants. 

Many is the fishing person, male or female, that despise the cormorants of our water ways.  The prime reason for this revile is never divulged.  Instead scorn and hatred is cast at these water birds, by the piscatorial followers with always the united cry, "they eat all the bloody fish".  Whether or not you subscribe to this theory, is irrelevant.  I being a keen observer of all birds and specializing in water birds can attest that shags, (another name for Cormorant),  do eat a lot of fish.  The theory, which is actually not true that they eat all the fish is easily disproved.  Ask a fishing person to show you a starving cormorant!  It can't be done unless the cormorant has just eaten, the very last.  If you really want to rub salt in the wound, approach the fishing person with psychology.  Ask the fishing person what's the biggest fish he/she's ever caught.  This is sure to take a while to be described to you.  There is relativity between size of the fish and the length of the tale, but the end result will be, that unless he was using a cormorant for tackle,  that had to be one fish the cormorant didn't catch.  Folk from the fishing fraternity love to exaggerate, so it's highly likely you will be able add insult to injury and point out that the fish was bigger, than any cormorant so even if a cormorant, had been able to catch that fish or a fish that size, the cormorant couldn't eat it!  One thing's for sure cormorants don't return fish to the water no matter what the size!  

The truth is fishermen have built up this hate of this bird, because the bird is the ultimate catcher of fish. Candidness is an admirable quality so I will have to be honest and reveal that I am not that keen on these birds either.  Curiously the reason is uncomplicated.  They catch fish whether I do or not!. 

Life is short and I have learnt from it that if one looks for the positive aspects, in life, one tends to be more happy.  Watching a Little Pied Cormorant while I was fishing the other day I was trying very hard not to be negative.  This bird was bobbing and diving, and each time it surfaced it had a fish firmly in it's beak.  I was tempted to find a gun, but I had been told by a duck shooter that they are no good to eat.  He assures me he did try it once and then he emphatically insisted that if it was the last living thing left in the world to eat, he would turn vegetarian! 

After this smaller, of the cormorants has had his fill of fish he came out of the water, stretched out its wings in the sun, I assume to dry them.  I really was thinking what an easy shot, when I was overcome by surprise.  This bird while doing its drying exercise could be used, instead of a compass.  If it is facing the sun and its around lunchtime, it's beak is facing north.  What a discovery! Of course if its back is to the sun around the same time then it's beak is pointing south.  Expanding on this monumental exposition, if the beak was facing north then with the wings spread-eagled to dry the right wing would be pointing east and the left wing west.  Pursuing this line of thought of a solar powered little pied cormorant compass further, brought me around to reality.  It would be fine in the day time but night time!  

Breeding season again would create more problems as the  cormorant then gives up it's solitudinal life and instead of worshiping the sun, starts worshiping a mate. Well no one could accuse me of not trying to be positive.

That duck shooter, mentioned above did tell me though, that if it wasn't for the cormorants there wouldn't be any fish at all!  Could you resist asking how that could possibly be?  I couldn't and this is the parable he spun me.  He started off by suggesting that the largest and the most fish, that are in the waterways can be found around snags and then asked me if I agreed.  I thought about this for two split seconds and concurred.  Why argue with something that's reasonable? Then he suggests apart from the man made snags, the most common snag in a river is a tree, and as with his first statement asks if I want to debate this point.  This time I took three split seconds churning the point over in my head. Couldn't work out where I was headed so I just nodded my head to give me room to manoeuvre if I needed to.  Then very delicately and quietly he slips a direct question at me and asks, how do all those trees manage to find there way in the river.  Remembering briefly his statement that if it wasn't for the cormorants there wouldn't be any fish, I was tempted to tell him facetiously, that the cormorants went and hired chainsaws, but behaving as close to normal as I could, I suggested back to him delicately and quietly, that maybe floods and strong winds were the most likely causes.  He actually looked at me with pity, which showed in his sensitive eyes, and told me I was pretty normal, with an answer like that, but the truth was some what different.  For the second time in roughly the same number of minutes, I found myself asking, how could this possibly be.  He looked me straight in the eyes again, as if judging me and asked me if I could keep a secret.  How many more questions did I need to answer, when it was him that was telling the story crossed, my mind for four split seconds, but I figured, what the heck, I'm in it this deep, lets go for broke.  I looked him straight back in the eyes and without so much as a hint of a blink, said delicately and quietly, yes.  What a conspiracy this seemed with all this cloak and dagger stuff.  This hunter of ducks then looks around as if to make sure that's there's no one in earshot, and then unveils to me, that he believes in god.  Six split seconds later I just nodded.  Preferably I would have retreated to anywhere away from there, but this statement numbed the brain so much, it stopped functioning.  Nodding did the trick though and he then carried on without another question, thank his god!.  Cormorants are gods creatures he tells me, and their job in his gods master plan is to ensure that there are many snags as possible in rivers.  This ensures that fish stay plentiful and the balance in nature in relationship to cormorants and fish is perpetually maintained.  Seven split seconds I nodded again, swallowing a regurgitating question. "General knowledge of what I am about to tell you", the duck shooter said "would have that many, self interest groups interfering with gods master plan, all manner of things could go wrong and that is why you are sworn not to pass on this information".  Then he relates the nitty gritty.  When the fish start to become a little scarce in any particular part of a river, the cormorants decide among them, which tree would be appropriate to topple into the water.  Once a unanimous decision is reached all the cormorants use that tree as their roosting destination each evening.  These birds eat more that seven times their own weight in fish every day so what happens is they over fertilize the tree.  Over a period of time this eventually kills the tree. That's one of the reasons you very rarely see a live tree fallen in the river.  Given that the tree becomes weaker and weaker it's only time before it topples.  He added, have you ever noticed the way cormorants congregate on one tree together!  Eight split seconds later I just nodded.