<blockquote class=quoteheader>Ray Daywalker Clarke wrote (
see)</blockquote><blockquote class=quote>
Sorry but this is not a test case at all.
Hertfordshire Council banned Angling from one bank at Aldenham Res, a number of years ago.
An Angler, who had not paid for his day ticket was pike fishing, as he went to cast he caught a passerby with the lure, Fishing banned from the bank.
Wouldyou be ableto have an area fenced off, so Joe public can still walk around, but don't get in the way of anglers at the same time. As I have not fished there I don't know, that's why I am asking.</blockquote>
.
You may be right, Ray, which is why I put a question mark in the headline. The difference here is that, instead of a ban being the result of an accident, STW are enshrining it as H&S code. Once there's an acceptance that angling and walking don't mix, where does that lead us? Just think about the implications.
Some H&S is good but some is just common sense made law, which is bad. And as I said, the same action isn't taken for much more hazardous activities like sailing, nor is walking itself seen as an issue. If I trip on the edge of pavement slab which is raised more than 3/4 inch, I can sue the council. Does STW make sure that all its footpaths have no corrugations? Does it feel it's liable for people slipping on ice, or tripping over branches?
As for the fencing solution, that's much more expensive than simply stopping the fishing. Guess which route most authorities would take?
Whenever anything like this comes up, angling is sidelined for the simple reason that the rambling lobby, or any other lobby, is much stronger than angling. Good on the Angling Trust for taking this issue on. Please sign the petition and prove that we aren't the apathetic bunch we always appear to be.
