Swans, the angler's best friend
|
CONSEQUENCES
A recent posting from our foremost Forumeer, 'The Monk', set me thinking. The thread related to a report that some swans have been found that have allegedly ingested angler's baiting needles. Now, swans vs. anglers is a source of friction that has rumbled on for some time, but there is now a much darker threat to angling if swans are found to contain harmful needles.
The problem comes when said swans are whipped off ponds by those poor starving asylum seekers. If one of these darlings is injured through eating roast 'swan à la grapefruit' (nearest I could get to duck à l'orange!) which contains a baiting needle, anglers will be hunted up and down the land. You can be assured that someone is to blame, and we will be persecuted for causing some kind of breach of human rights and for endangering life.
The weight of public feeling will always side with the hapless victim and compensation claims will no doubt run into thousands of pounds. These claims will be vigorously championed by the 'Department That Makes Bloody Sure That No One Is Beastly To Asylum Seekers In Any Way' who will ensure that all anglers are searched for weapons of mass destruction before they are allowed on the bank side.
How else do we impact?
What else do we do that could possibly impact on others and leave us liable to prosecution? Think of the poor cyclist on the towpath who runs over one or more sections of your pole that you have thoughtlessly abandoned in his/her path. Apart from the obvious danger of them tripping up, falling off and hurting themselves (undoubtedly whiplash and a neck brace will feature in it somewhere!) there is the question of the dust and fibres thrown up from the splintered carbon. If the poor cyclists breathe them in, who knows what medical complications may arise in years to come? (Although, if the hapless cyclist is lying, stunned and face down on the towpath, you could try inserting the splintered end of a pole section into a suitable place on their body, to see if it has any immediate medical side effects!).
Then you could find yourself facing charges of abandonment. All those ducks, and robins you feed during the cold winter months, what if they become dependant on you for food? What if you feed them one day and then fail to return to that spot? Will the poor things just sit there, wasting away, waiting for you to come back? You can imagine the RSPB and others will be keeping tabs on you, with charges of abandonment and cruelty being brought. Come to think of it, pre baiting, loose feeding and ground baiting will fall under the same umbrella. So once you start feeding fish you have no option but to continue ad infinitum. Carp anglers - just carry on as normal!
Bank stick and brolly pole holes, they can't be a source of danger, can they? Well, imagine some poor, infirm person passing by where you have just de-camped and their walking stick happens to locate in the hole you have just left on the bank. The mayhem caused by their only means of support suddenly being six inches shorter than they expect doesn't bear thinking about. The infirm and elderly aren't best equipped to perform cartwheels. Make sure you fill any holes before leaving!
Tackle Review - Reviewed
The latest gem was a long-term test on a specialist chair. Retailing at a very affordable £63 it only threw up two minor niggles during the test.
Point one was the lack of mud feet. One can only imagine the tester sitting in the slowly sinking chair, and as the seat settles into the ooze and his bum gets soaking wet (again!) “I must mention the lack of mud feet.”
Point two was the seat cover kept slipping off (and was difficult to replace). Once again, as the tester was pitched off the seat and into the ooze by the slipping cover no doubt he thought, “I must mention that”.
Please, please, don't mention it to us! Tell the manufacturer that their product is crap and tell them to do something about it!
The fact that he had the seat on test for six months is interesting. If I had shelled out £63 on a seat I would rather the cover stayed on, and I think I might mention the fact before six months had passed.
There appears to be little in the way of follow up with these tackle reviews. If a valid point is raised while an item is on test, it would be interesting to see feedback from the manufacturer in the same report. Is that too much to ask?
I once bought a specialist chair from a well-known maker that had a metal bar across he front of the seat. This cut into the back of my knees. Being fearful of developing DVT, I covered the offending bar with pipe lagging, but to no real advantage. A polite letter to the manufacturer elicited a response that this was not a problem that they had ever encountered before. Some time afterwards a 'new and improved' model appeared without the offending bar at the front.
Not anything to do with me, but if it wasn't a problem, why fix it? If it was a problem what about all those people like me who bought the original and now walk round with red weals on the back of their knees? Shouldn't we get new 'improved' models free of charge!
Les Clark
