Swan Poisoned by Angler's Lead Weight

[Steve Walker]

The reporting of the lead shot fiasco, reminded me of another go at angling around that time. it was a kids TV programme, Blue Peter, Magpie type of thing. They had a mass of mono' line allegedly picked up on a short stretch of the R Witham, near Kirkstead I think. At the time, this water was primarily a fine line match water. The line they had on the show was, all about 6-10 bs and was as shiny as newly bought stuff, it hadn't dulled like it does in the open air and sunlight. Obviously, to a non angler, and especially kids, it looked like it was all above board. But anyone with a knowledge of angling and the water could see it for the fake it was.

 

I've seen that more than once. Line and hooks they claim to have found on the bank but which would be more at home on the beach.

[barblesss]

To all you who were FOR the lead ban or anything else that would save much wildlife around the banks we fish ... you are all a disgrace 'cause you disunite Angling!... LOL what a complete load of rubbish!

We should debate, discuss all the time on how we can improve Angling. We should all be open minded!

Regarding Live Baiting, ok agreed slightly different...

To be truthful I am neither for or against it.

In my opinion if the governing bodies ever decided live baiting was to be banned in England, I feel as a body we would be better off just rolling over and accepting it (I won't go into why, not worth it) and to be honest, so what if we lost livebaiting? Does it really matter. Go back to my 'greed' point here.

Why do we need to be so greedy. It would hardly be a big loss losing livebaiting. Some predator anglers will destroy me now, but I really don't think it's a 'biggy' . Many use deadbaits or spinners nowadays anyway.

I feel there may be times angling needs to adjust slightly to certain things in the future.

Edited July 19, 2006 by barblesss

[Dick Dastardly]

I certainly have never said that anglers supporting wildlife conservation issues cause dis unity and dont think anyone else here has either.

 

By the comments made by barbless re theloss of live baiting not being a big issue it makes me think that you dont have much experience of pike fishing so shouldnt really comment.By all means both hold and tell us your own personal veiw but dont make unfounded statements that certainly arnt and there fore cant be based/backed up with practical experience.

 

However it is not as simple as whether live baiting is necessary or not,as after all angling itself isnt necessary is it? I once again refer to the wider issue of us all sticking hooks in fish.

 

This buisness of "greed" confuses me care to explain?

 

As we are now discussing the future of angling in general I for one would be interested in reading your thoughts as to why we would be better off just "rolling over"? Also please let me make clear that despite my own personal veiws on live baiting this isnt really just a live baiting issue.There are many other things that us anglers seem prepared to give to the antis to assist them in their slow but steady war of attrition to get angling stoped

[chesters1]

there was swan related stuff on newsround today (kids prog) with the usual "lead poisening" there was a collection of other "tackle" removed from swans , unfortunately only one side was shown and no mention made to how long this collection had accumalated and how many swans died from "lead poisening" but if this little collection had accumalated over ten years then mr swan compared to natural death by flying into obsticles etc was very safe in close company with anglers.

unfortunately nothing much was said just the usual scenes of poorly swan etc (didnt mention what ailed the swan) and scenes of now "cured" swans being released but the inferance had already been made whether true or not

[gozzer]

As I said in an earlier post, I know the water mentioned in the report, and can see how anglers lead shot could be to blame. There has been angling on there for over 100yrs, so how long could any shot have been lying there? This is the first case of this kind I can recall on this water. Not a bad average, compared with the other hazards that wild life have to contend with.

 

Barbless, I must be missing something on here, because you seem to be quoting posts that I'm unable to see. Has something been deleted?

[Dick Dastardly]

It was recently brought up on another similar disscusion that swans could still be picking up shot from the years it was legal and widely used.Thats a very long time.

 

But once again what percentage of this is actually "split shot" rather than shot from cartridges.

[gozzer]

It was recently brought up on another similar disscusion that swans could still be picking up shot from the years it was legal and widely used.Thats a very long time.

 

But once again what percentage of this is actually "split shot" rather than shot from cartridges.

 

No shooting near the water in question Budgie, it's in a park with BMX track, swing park, and houses on two sides, a yacht club on one end and the Leeds Bradford Airport on the other.

 

 

Here's a panoramic view of the tarn from the jetty, yacht club and activity centre to your right, houses behind trees opposite, airport behind trees far end.

 

 

http://www.uk360s.co.uk/360-viewer/index.p...p;tmplt=default

Edited July 19, 2006 by gozzer

[Steve Burke]

I suppose my point is that despite us having a lead ban we still get the blame for it .Therefore we havent actually "shown" our concern/done the right thing in the eyes of our "accusers! We have maybe eased our "concience"! but it isnt our selves we have to convince is it.

 

As I wrote "we also needed to ban lead ourselves and additionally be seen to be doing so."

 

Unfortunately we weren't seen to be doing so and we still aren't. Quite obviously the message just hasn't got through.

 

IMO we badly shot ourselves in the foot there, and we're still paying the price. This was one of the turning points, and partly because of this many members of the public think that anglers aren't conservationists nor are we the harmless fools they once believed us to be.

 

It wasn't helped by at least one of the weeklies running a campaign to keep lead shot. I'd like to think they'd be more enlightened in these greener times.

[Dick Dastardly]

Thanks Steve that was certainly more the point I was trying to make rather than sugesting that we should have kept lead shot.

 

Im not disputing that some swans may well have picked up anglers split shot its just that the chances must surely be higher (simply due to the shear difference in amounts used) that swans have picked up shot gun shot?

 

Also it doesnt have to be the water that they live on that they have picked up shot from either source.

 

I feel all of this though only serves to cloud the issue.I origonally replied to the question of why we took all the blame (and still unarguabley do) and I stick to my origonal reply.Rather than arguing the rights and wrongs of the lead shot/swan issue let us (as I was trying to point out) simpley try and learn from what has happened in this issue when we "roll over".Not a case of personal opinion/theories just a case of noting what history shows us.

 

Other wise I feel that anglers in the not to distant future will be discussing the rights and wrongs of far more important bans...like angling itself.

[Anderoo]

As I wrote "we also needed to ban lead ourselves and additionally be seen to be doing so."

 

Unfortunately we weren't seen to be doing so and we still aren't. Quite obviously the message just hasn't got through.

 

IMO we badly shot ourselves in the foot there, and we're still paying the price. This was one of the turning points, and partly because of this many members of the public think that anglers aren't conservationists nor are we the harmless fools they once believed us to be.

 

It wasn't helped by at least one of the weeklies running a campaign to keep lead shot. I'd like to think they'd be more enlightened in these greener times.

 

This is the kind of point I've been trying to make. If we want to be seen as guardians of the waterways, conservationists, and lovers of nature, we ourselves should choose to discontinue practices or items of tackle that contradict this ideal. It's not about rolling over and giving in. Being bullish and conceding nothing gives entirely the wrong message. If fishing ever does really come under the spotlight it will be the general public who decide its fate - not us. It makes sense to keep the public happy; surely that's obvious? Remember fox hunting?

 

Imagine, if you will, a serious co-ordinated campaign against angling. Picture the front covers of brochures, the homepages of websites, the graphics used in news reports. What do you think those pictures would be of? Please understand, I am not saying we should give in. What I am saying is that we are in a position to remove ammuntion from serious antis who in turn influence the general public, who will in turn ultimately decide our fate.