Angling Times vs Angler's Mail

[tincatinca]

I remember when 'Baby Doll' used to refer to certain items of nightware but then again I also remember when PYM, Farleys rusks and Sausage rusk were all the rage not to mention the numerous trips into shops full of eastern exotic promise for that killing ingredient or particle which would enable one to take the water apart and I never went anywhere without my jar of Bovril to dunk my crusts:D

[gozzer]

I agree that the 'turning point' was in the 80s, but it's a kind of 'chicken and egg' thing. Did the changes in angling, force the papers to provide a need? Or were the papers instrumental in helping to create that need?

The 80s saw the start of the 'commercial' type fishery, and this combined with an apparent lack of fish in the rivers, (I never found this to be true), pushed the newcomers, (as well as some established anglers), in the direction of these waters. This 'easy' fishing raised expectations of what was a decent days fishing.

Tackle manufacturers, and 'celebs', quickly jumped on this 'bandwagon' as a way of making money. The angling weeklies (reliant on the advertising revenue), went along with this.

Now we have a whole generation of anglers who are 'brainwashed into thinking that this is the only way. Fortunately we also have forums like AN, that try to widen the horizons of those who care to listen. But you only have to hear the views of some of the newer members, to see how limited their angling experience is. I hear it on the bank regularly.

 

This is not a 'shot' at the new anglers, we all have to ask at times, and indeed we are all still learning. But it's much more satisfying to work something out for yourself. I've given this advice on here before, but it's as true now as when I was told it about 45yrs ago.

Ask, listen and learn, but never take anything as 'absolute'. Always try to adapt what you learn to suit you, and the waters you fish.

 

John.

[tincatinca]

It is interesting to read the many excellent comments that have been made but do you think that in todays world too much emphasis is made on achievments in terms of size and number of fish caught coupled with a degree of perceived street cred when it comes to tackle used. I sometimes find it quite amazing to listen to some of the comments particularly of some of the younger generation made both on the bank and in the tackle shops regarding tackle, bait and methodology. In part I believe it is to do with cultural changes over the years. I have engaged in conversation on many occassions to be be told that I am behind the times and that we are living in a modern world. It is sad that some people will not think for themselves and treat the words of their particular guru as being definative.

[Anderoo]

It is sad that some people will not think for themselves and treat the words of their particular guru as being definitive.

 

Absolutely, especially when so many 'gurus' are sponsered or employed by a tackle or bait (or both) company and have a corporate agenda.

 

Which brings us nicely to another point about the mags - the endless product placements It really detracts from the point of the article and turns the whole thing into an 'advertorial'. If a certain bait or piece of tackle really did help in the catching of a fish, then it's important. Otherwise, we don't need to know about it!

[Dick Dastardly]

What you say is true Tinca..but I dont think we were really that much different just that instead of being a tackle tart with Shimano Bait runners/big pits we were ultra cult with Mitchell 300's!.Walker,Stone,Taylor (FJ and bros that is not old Des!!) were our gurus.I would like to think that they were far better role models but whose to say? if we had been born a few decades later we might be worshipping Hayes/Hearn etc,well maybe? But I do worry if the modern day guys will still be as keen if fishing at all in 40 years time? I say this as I honestly believe it is only the diversity of being an all rounder that has kept me in the game for so long.A lot of the carp gurus of the 80's/90's have faded away allready let alone the present ones.Strange how the all rounders are still there though. Wilson being a prime example and I shopuld imagine Hayes will be as well. Be interesting to see.

 

Lastly (honestly!) I think a lot of the "romance" has gone from the area of the "known" angler/angling writer/expert.Simply because the practicalities of trying to be a "proffesional" angler.None of our "greats" (to my knowledge anyway) had to rely on their sport or writing about it etc to make a living.No wonder the likes of Hayes etc articles are full of product placement,its how he feeds himself. Would any of us do different in his shoes?

 

A quick annecdote on product placement-

 

A good friend of mine caught a very big and subsequently very publicised pike.He was contacted by a mutual friend who at the time wrote in the papers/mags.The friend offered to act as an "agent" for the fish! by this it was meant that he would do the rounds of the press and tackle/bait etc manufacturers to get the best possible deals for the use of the fishs capture and subsequent pictures.We were all amazed at how much people were prepared to give the captor if he said it was on their product even if it wasnt! When my mate first told me he had agreed to this I was at first supprised and dissapointed in him.He explained to me though why he had gone for it. Firstly everyone was at it! and after all the years why shouldnt he take advantage of the situation? Also was it actually going to hurt ? after all anyone in the know would know the truth anyway and for those that didnt? well it wasnt really going to hurt the novice angler, the fish or anyone else really if he said the fish was caught on rod A or rod B as both were perfectly ok! At least the newbie buying and using the rod would have some confidence in it! Maybe he was right it doesnt really hurt................my only gripe in this context though is that I want to read a good article not a good tackle/bait add in a mag/paper Ive paid for!!!

 

To quote my mate when we discussed the later bait deal he got out of the capture " I said it was caught on one of-------------'s baits as hes been a good mate and his company has given me a lot of bait for free.....................and I didnt think there was much chance of Beejams giving me a freezer!"

Edited February 4, 2008 by BUDGIE

[Jeff S]

Nope. I actually told the editor of one of the magazines mentioned here recently that if any thread was started mentioning their magazine, I could pretty much name, in advance, who would slate them.

 

Just need Peter Waller to chip in now, and I'll have been 100% correct

 

Haven't seen him on here in a long time. Last post was 9 Jan 2008.

[Steve Walker]

I agree that the 'turning point' was in the 80s, but it's a kind of 'chicken and egg' thing. Did the changes in angling, force the papers to provide a need? Or were the papers instrumental in helping to create that need?

 

I think the changes were as much as anything else a reflection of changes in society in general, of the media in general and of the red-top newspapers in particular.

[Steve Walker]

Maybe he was right it doesnt really hurt................

 

http://www.moviewavs.com/0058536645/MP3S/M...mp/imtaking.mp3

 

"which everybody knows isn't true, but Mama said it was just a little white lie, so it wasn't hurting nobody"

[tincatinca]

Budgie Wrote

 

What you say is true Tinca..but I dont think we were really that much different just that instead of being a tackle tart with Shimano Bait runners/big pits we were ultra cult with Mitchell 300's!.Walker,Stone,Taylor (FJ and bros that is not old Des!!) were our gurus.I would like to think that they were far better role models but whose to say? if we had been born a few decades later we might be worshipping Hayes/Hearn etc,well maybe? But I do worry if the modern day guys will still be as keen if fishing at all in 40 years time? I say this as I honestly believe it is only the diversity of being an all rounder that has kept me in the game for so long.A lot of the carp gurus of the 80's/90's have faded away allready let alone the present ones.Strange how the all rounders are still there though. Wilson being a prime example and I shopuld imagine Hayes will be as well. Be interesting to see.

 

I agree wholheartedly that we were inluenced on the tackle front whether it be the Mitchell 300 or Abu 54/55 series for example along with using electric alarms from silver paper on knitting needles and additionally that we were influenced by various writers of the time. It is a personal opinion but I do not believe that tackle has developed to the degree that it puts that much more on the bank and makes you a much better angler. I also think the point that being an all rounder is significant, as to an aspiring angler in days gone by, that was the norm and not the exception. I have no doubt that you or I would be reasonably successful today using the equipment and baits that we did then. When I started to fish seriously, the main thing that was drummed in to me was first to find the fish as you cannot catch them if they are not there, then having found the fish, how to go about catching them relative to the prevailing conditions at any given time. This in turn led to literally thousands of hours being spent to gain a reasonable understanding and level of water craft which is on going as long as you fish but the experience gained certainly stands you in good stead and makes you you think and ask questions when things are not going right as opposed to sticking with the in method.

[jeremyburnside]

I find these far too general ie most producing articles on carp, more carp, match, ponds, gravel pits, british, maseer? european, cuban! Which most of the time don't interest me. I now rarely buy fishing magazines. However I would buy a more specialised publication on 'River fishing' and then as the season changes or the fancy takes me buy another on, say pond fishing...............Jeremy