Swan Poisoned by Angler's Lead Weight

[kleinboet]

Both Bob and Aneroo have raised some good points. Angling has changed a lot - and the anglers outlook has. I get funny looks when I go out in the pouring rain, catch fish and come home empty handed. My retort is always "those fish are too good to catch just once!!".

Angling HAS changed over the last 20 years, with anglers having to step backwards every time. Insinuations such as lead poisoning, disturbing fish stocks, interfering with nature etc. etc.

 

What has been done about shooting, duck breeding, Salmon farming etc??

Edited June 1, 2006 by kleinboet

[RPM]

I think Zaphod summed it up quite nicely in his first post and personally I think ALL lead weights of any desciption and size should be removed from the shelves.

 

If we/I/all of us cant or wont use a lead free alternative, we simply should not be fishing. Technology is such that we should not have to and if certain sizes or type of weight are not available in non toxic then we, as responsible anglers should make the compromise and use something else so as not to compromise the ecosystem or the animals that dont have the intelligence to make these choices. No excuses should be made or listened too. It is ethically, morally and sensibly the only option.

 

Wildfoul, be they native or seasonal visitors should be respcted absolutely, together with all of mother natures treasures that we, the angling community, are privileged to encounter. Anyone caught using lead or committing other atrocities including littering, leaving discarded line, sweetcorn and other tins should be thrown off the water and out of angling for good.

 

This is not to appease the anti community but a thank you back to the wonderful environment from which we gain so much pleasure. It is just not acceptable to degrade our cherished landscape and fellow creatures.

 

Sorry for the rant, just a topic that I hold close to my heart.

[Bob Bradford]

Budgie , The recent incident at Holyhead is food and drink to those that want our sport banned, and it would /could be very,very damaging to angling, it would not require a great deal of effort to exploit and expose anglings soft underbelly, and whilst I know you and others are very frustrated by some of the current laws, I feel we all have a duty to adhere to them, try to change the laws by all means ....but do not break them , the current laws are there to help protect the environment and must be heeded, however , if you and others can construct a powerful argument based on facts and truths then I would support wholeheartedly a change in the laws for the benefit of predator anglers..... persistently breaking the law is not a powerful argument and will be turned against us, not just predator anglers either....but all of angling.

So Budgie, how would you like to change the current laws regarding fish movement and livebaiting?

And how will you be able to ensure waters are not contaminated by disease?

[slodger]

"The question is not one of legality but rather one of ethics. That's the problem. As hard as I look, I can't see any ethical reason to use keepents, for example; but, as you say, it's perfectly legal. "

 

Anti angling groups represent a minimal risk to our sport. A far greater danger is the disunity within our ranks, and our own self serving hypocritical views. The remark above typifys that for me. I honestly have to pinch myself when reading such comments.

 

How do ethics come into it? If we're going to look to ethics in angling, is it ethical to catch a fish in the first place?

[slodger]

"Budgie , The recent incident at Holyhead is food and drink to those that want our sport banned..."

 

I agree wholeheartedly Bob, so is it really beneficial to keep flagging it up and keep it constantly at the forefront of the non angling public's attention? You. I and virtually everyone else within angling has had their say now and condemned the culprits out of hand.

 

They have resigned from the PAC. The PAC has issued a public statement condemning these kinds of illegal activity, and they will no doubt face a court case and punishment from the relevant authority. What more do you wish to see done? A total ban on pike fishing? Isn't it time you and the rest of us dropped the subject now?

 

Perhaps I'm doing you a misjustice, but it seems as though you've spotted an opportunity to decry a faction of angling that you appear to have an irrational dislike for, and you're not going to let the opportunity to score points against them get away from you. I hope you're every bit as vociferous the next time there's any hint of a scandal within the match fishing scene, because rest assured, there will be at some point. Anglers are human beings, and it follows that an element of them, whatever their preferred discipline, will break the rules, and be caught doing so.

[Bob Bradford]

Slodger, I respectfully wish to point out there is a vast difference between breaking fishery rules.... and breaking the law, now, how many match anglers are breaking the law every weekend?

 

I am not trying to alienate one discipline from another, but lets look at this properly, and if match anglers were breaking the law...yes I would be equally vociferous.

 

It always turns into the same old personal crap, debate the issues on the evidence...not on what you perceive I may or may not think.

 

Certain lead shot are banned and have been for nearly 20yrs now, when the issue first came up our governing body rolled over with barely a whimper, we bent over and took it up the wotsit largely based on circumstantial claptrap... I learned a lot about anglers then and nothing much has changed regarding anglers attitudes, there was no solidarity then and there is no solidarity now...nor will there be whilst there is an element routinely breaking laws they disagree with, if it is pikers, how am I to blame? I will not support them in their illegal acts... they are breaking the laws of this Country in the name of fishing, in pursuit of another fish, I hope now you can distinguish the difference.

[Dick Dastardly]

Budgie , The recent incident at Holyhead is food and drink to those that want our sport banned, and it would /could be very,very damaging to angling, it would not require a great deal of effort to exploit and expose anglings soft underbelly, and whilst I know you and others are very frustrated by some of the current laws, I feel we all have a duty to adhere to them, try to change the laws by all means ....but do not break them , the current laws are there to help protect the environment and must be heeded, however , if you and others can construct a powerful argument based on facts and truths then I would support wholeheartedly a change in the laws for the benefit of predator anglers..... persistently breaking the law is not a powerful argument and will be turned against us, not just predator anglers either....but all of angling.

So Budgie, how would you like to change the current laws regarding fish movement and livebaiting?

And how will you be able to ensure waters are not contaminated by disease?

 

 

A good answer Bob and one that I can not argue with.

 

I constantly bang on about the laws regarding fish (for bait) movement but have to be honest and accept that even though a system could be (in fact there all ready is a perfectly usable one as such in place all ready!) brought in it and many others would fail due to people bending and miss using it. This is probably what really fuels my frustration.

 

Any changes to make it easier for anglers wanting to move fish for bait would be jumped on by the fish rearing trade and be generally abused for their benefit.

 

It is hard enough for the existing rules to be enforced. In an ideal world you would hope that if any easier system was set up to facilitate the movement of bait all would then be able to adhere to it as there would surely then be no need to break the law? Sadly though I must once again admit that there would still most likely be idiots who just couldn’t be bothered.

 

So I think from a fish disease prevention/translocation of species point of view we would be no better off. Be nice for those who did make the effort to be able to be legal though. The real cut of introducing an easy legal system is that it would in effect also make it easier to do it illegally! Bob can you now see my/our frustration?

 

Maybe we should tighten it up even more? The idiots will be caught easier but the guys who know what they are on (and inevitably pose an absolute minimum risk) will just carry on as usual but still sadly breaking the law? A lot of "top pikers" have held this view for a long time. They don’t get drawn into any form of debate on livebaits, dont claim to use them, in fact are totally "grey" about the whole subject. BUT all the time have an extensive stock of baits that they take and use all around the country "on the quiet".

 

They are I suppose right its just that it rubs me having to break the law and therefore being automatically lumped in with the real idiots AND not having a leg to stand on when I feel forced to justify my actions.

 

I wish (and so I bet do many other live baiting pikers) that using lives wasn’t that necessary as we could all do without being law breaking, eco system destroying scum, not to mention all the effort that goes into getting,keeping,transporting "healthy" lives.

 

And what’s more I honestly believe that one of the reasons that the EA don’t try and bring in a different system is that they see the issue the same as I’ve presented it. They appear to be more than happy to keep the existing rules in to cover against wholesale and blatantly irresponsible fish/species movements whilst aiding/turning a blind eye to those who do it within the confines of the rules. Trouble is of course they can’t be seen to be allowing this so have to come down on any unlucky person who is caught out. (Please note I’m not including Williams and Banks in this category).

 

So in short Bob I don’t really have a perfect answer. I will carry on doing what I do both angling and bait wise. I will also keep reminding people of the TRUE facts behind the issue. I will also continue to be frustrated by a situation which is far from ideal but which I can’t honestly see a solution to..........all because of a few selfish/stupid/ill informed people who will always be amongst us and always keep the problem alive.

[slodger]

Slodger, I respectfully wish to point out there is a vast difference between breaking fishery rules.... and breaking the law, now, how many match anglers are breaking the law every weekend?

 

I am not trying to alienate one discipline from another, but lets look at this properly, and if match anglers were breaking the law...yes I would be equally vociferous.

 

It always turns into the same old personal crap, debate the issues on the evidence...not on what you perceive I may or may not think.

 

Certain lead shot are banned and have been for nearly 20yrs now, when the issue first came up our governing body rolled over with barely a whimper, we bent over and took it up the wotsit largely based on circumstantial claptrap... I learned a lot about anglers then and nothing much has changed regarding anglers attitudes, there was no solidarity then and there is no solidarity now...nor will there be whilst there is an element routinely breaking laws they disagree with, if it is pikers, how am I to blame? I will not support them in their illegal acts... they are breaking the laws of this Country in the name of fishing, in pursuit of another fish, I hope now you can distinguish the difference.

 

Rules? Laws? I think the difference is largely a question of semantics Bob, and well you know it!

 

'Personal'? Believe me you're flattering yourself.

 

I'm not really in disagreement with you either, I believe I've conceded the point elsewhere on this forum, I think it's by and large a fair criticism that pike angling has an even greater claim to angling's 'Rogues Gallery' than other disciplines. My point in simple terms was whether it is expedient for angling, our mutual sport, to be repeatedly harping on about this particular regrettable episode. How does that sit with your points regarding angling unity?

 

You are of course, perhaps legitimately in terms of the debate, ignoring the fact, (yes fact!) that pike fishing suffers, arguably more than other elements, from particularly ill advised and inappropriate legislation, particularly around the use of live-bait. Okay, as you've inferred, the laws are what the laws are, and as such they should undoubtedly be adhered to. However until they are revised to represent sensible measures, unfortunate though it unquestionably is, some anglers are going to flout the rules....sorry 'laws'.

Edited June 1, 2006 by slodger

[Dick Dastardly]

This is now running over three threads.For me my last post was really the final word I can say.I will go along with what Chris says and just let the subject drop as all this disscusion shows is our lack of unity within angling to those outside.

 

Going to open (er in fact re-open) the subject of angling unity on another thread.I will not discuss the rights or wrongs of any of the disciplines dodgey areas (ie pike live baits,matchmans keepnets) but rather the need for us all to accept each others ways.

[Bob Bradford]

I accept that potentially addressing this issue is driving wedges between different disciplines within our sport, but I have to repeat ...there is a vast difference between breaking the law of this land IE; illegally transferring fish,.... and breaking a fishery law IE; barbless hook rule etc;

 

So accepting none of us is perfect (yes even match anglers) I am arguing that match anglers and most other law abiding anglers, will never get behind pikers ,if pikers persistently break (not fishery rules) but the laws of the land... therefore it begs the question, who is driving the wedge?

 

I agree with Budgie on most of his last two posts... and conclude , stopping anglers breaking the law is like trying to plat sand.