Reports of the Tarn’s death have been greatly exaggerated
“The Tarn is now dead.”
“Feeding the ducks has produced a situation where the Tarn is an ecological disaster.”
“We want to bring life back to the Tarn and that can only be done if the number of ducks is greatly reduced.”
A certain organization has been describing the Tarn as an “ecological disaster” in the press. It’s an attention grabbing headline, but is it true? These changes are being marketed as bringing “life” back to the Tarn but this is disingenuous. The Tarn is actually a hotspot of biodiversity which attracts a range of species including deer, ducks, moorhens, heron, and geese. They simply want to replace the ducks with stickleback, frogs, and aquatic plants. The organization speaks wistfully of a time when the Tarn was full of frogs and toads and is using dirty water as an opportunity to remove the ducks.
But the Tarn is the perfect place for parents to feed the ducks with their children. On sunny days, the Tarn is now full of parents explaining to crying children why they can't feed the ducks. It’s also perfect for older residents with mobility issues. The Tarn water has been dirty since the early 90s and it hasn’t caused any issues yet. It’s simply too shallow for anybody to swim in so there’s no danger of accidentally drinking the water. It’s also down-stream of other water sources on the moors.
This is driven by a preference for fish and frogs over ducks. But fish and frogs are a dreadful alternative to ducks. Fish are all-but invisible because of the reflectivity of the water. Frogs are shy and form a dull green blob in a sheltered corner. Neither are species that children or parents can interact with whereas ducks can be enjoyed by people of all ages and their antics add charm to the Tarn all year round. Even in winter when the tarn is frozen solid!
Signs have been installed telling people vaguely to go to "the river" instead but nobody can control where the ducks congregate. So in reality, the alternative is a jetty at the bottom of concrete staircase down at the park or the disused industrial estate converted into the Ben Rhydding nature reserve. Both are a 40 minute walk and neither are accessible by push-chairs or mobility scooters. There are no benches to sit on and the waters edge are unsafe for young children. This is a huge loss and a huge step backwards for Ilkley Tarn.
We suspect they should've been dredging or clearing the Tarn in some fashion every 20 years or so, but they haven't and the poo has been allowed to build up to current levels. Now they're trying to shift the blame onto residents. They’re describing it as “dead” and “barren” but it’s actually thriving, except it just can’t support fish and the ducklings eat the tadpoles. There’s still massive swarms of 50,000 tadpoles at least though, as anyone who visited the tarn in May just witnessed.
We don’t think these changes are justified.
If we must choose between ducks and frogs, then we say “Choose Ducks!”
Click here to sign our petition or scroll down to learn more…
What’s the problem with the ducks?
“There is no aquatic life, and the reason is the very large population of ducks.”
“They jump back in the water and poo. This is now a major source of pollution and has rendered the Tarn unable to support any aquatic life”
Sometimes it’s necessary to challenge organizational group-think. Does it matter if the Tarn can’t support frogs and stickleback? It’s downstream of other water sources on the moors and it’s the perfect place for feeding ducks with young children. The edges are safe and the ducks are accustomed to humans.
As an enclosed water body full of wild animals, surely we should expect it to be dirty? Residents have been teaching their children it’s dirty for over 30 years. It’s knee-deep in most places so people can’t swim even if they wanted to. It’s not the Wharfe. Is dirty water even a problem? It’s been like this for decades. We’re also not convinced that 60 ducks is a “very large” population. It doesn’t seem crowded and the birds can always fly away.
These aren’t the right priorities for the Tarn. We’d prefer grant monies be spent increasing the quantity of water flowing through the Tarn instead, or alternatives like dredging to remove sediment. Removing the sediment would improve the water quality and increase the capacity, which would also make it more resistant to droughts caused by climate change in the future. We’d even like to see habitat improvements for ducks to protect against heron.
Why are these changes happening?
“When my wife and I walked our dog up to the Tarn, in the evenings 30 years ago, in the Spring, one had to be careful not to tread on toads, they were so numerous. Now there are no sticklebacks, no toads, no frogs, no aquatic life whatsoever“
“The Tarn was a thriving pond with sticklebacks and a huge breeding population of frogs”
“When the water is clearer, I hope we can consider ways of introducing suitable aquatic plants and then perhaps, in a few years’ time, we might, once more, need to take care when walking around the Tarn on a Spring evening, not to tread on a toad.”
Justification for these plans has changed over the years. Recently it became bird-flu but previously it was water quality. The first article only appeared after an older gentleman wearing a ‘Make America Great Again’ hat began feeding the ducks from a mobility scooter. It told residents to go to the Wharfe but direct access to the river is limited and residents can’t control where the ducks congregate. Sometimes ducks congregate upon an old concrete jetty at the bottom of a broken concrete staircase at the far end of the park. This excludes residents with mobility issues, young children, or push-chairs.
It’s also hard to find a location further from the Tarn. Residents shouldn’t need to swap the Tarn for an ugly and treacherous section of the Wharfe at the opposite end of town. Is this really about ecology? It sounds like nostalgia. We believe there’s a reason why residents supported the ducks for 40 years and that reason hasn’t changed.
What about bird-flu?
“Where lots of birds congregate, there is more chance of diseases like Bird Flu being spread”
The new Tarn signs say a larger group of birds is more at-risk of bird-flu but the Tarn hosts a duck population which doesn’t migrate (they over-winter at the Tarn) and we know from COVID that isolation is the best defense against any flu. These changes increase the risk of bird-flu being introduced to the Wharfe. The real risk is not the size of the flock, which doesn’t seem large for the Tarn, but from mixing with the thousand-strong flocks in the wild and returning with bird-flu. An isolated non-migratory population, like ours, has the best defence available.
Mallards are one of the fastest birds. They can migrate over 500km and form flocks of a thousand individuals. We shouldn’t be allowing the council to set a precedent that 60 ducks is a health hazard. That will likely lead to culling, and possibly serve as a precedent for culling in other nearby towns. These changes will also encourage the ducks to migrate during winter. How does encouraging the ducks to migrate decrease the risk of bird-flu?
What can I do to help?
“In its natural state, the Tarn could probably support one pair of ducks.”
”The current huge population is entirely due to feeding”
We doubt the Tarn can only support one pair of ducks but if the claims are true then generations of residents must have supported this colony for 40 years. We’d like to thank everybody who fed those ducks over the last four decades. You have enriched the Tarn for generations past and present, for residents and visitors alike. We ask you to continue.