Home Features Diaries Wintle’s World – Publicity, a Double-edged Sword?

Wintle’s World – Publicity, a Double-edged Sword?

March 19, 2009

MARK WINTLE

Mark Wintle, an angler for 37 years, is a prolific article writer and co-author of a book on pole fishing published in early 2008 and one on carp fishing due for publication in 2009. Previously heavily involved with match fishing he now fishes for the sheer fun of it. He has an open and enquiring mind and writes articles on fishing various waters with a variety of methods.

Publicity – A double-edged sword?

Is the publication of catches a good thing? Do features on waters cause problems? Where should we draw the line? What other factors come into play?

Angling newspapers, magazines and websites thrive on catch reports and feature articles yet there can be a serious downside to these articles and reports. First, though, I’d like to look at the positive side of this publicity.

Not all bad…

Without these reports and articles, we anglers would have to rely on word of mouth to hear about the potential of waters other than our own local venues. We would have little idea of what was happening generally with fish sizes, or the changing fish populations elsewhere. It is from the press (which now includes the internet) that we are able to glean information that can give us the chance to try other new venues, seek bigger fish or even attempt to judge our own catches by national or even just local standards. We might switch our allegiance from one club to another, try new baits or tactics, or even start fishing venues much closer to home rather than chasing rainbows along the motorway network of Britain.

So to those that decry the weekly papers as comics I’d say that you could be missing out, at least some of the time. There are all sorts of venue, fish and bait trends on display that ultimately affect all of our angling even if we don’t know it at the time. An example is the publicity given to the use of first trout and later halibut pellets in the late nineties on rivers for chub and barbel. The result was a sea change in bait usage on many rivers in just three years from extensive maggot and caster usage to replacement with pellets during 1997 to 2000.

For many clubs and day-ticket fisheries, publicity is the oxygen that breathes life into their continued existence. Without day-ticket, permit and membership sales, no money means no fishing so publicity is a vital tool in attracting anglers. And there are many waters that have the capacity to accept more anglers than is currently the case with the extra pressure causing no problems in any shape or form.

There is a downside though…

The first downside to lots of publicity being heaped on a venue is a big increase in the number of anglers fishing. If you’re a local happily enjoying your local venue and catching some good fish the last thing you want is all and sundry descending on the venue from afar to the degree you have to fight for a swim. Furthermore, the extra angling pressure is far more likely to be detrimental than beneficial. Sometimes you escape lightly; the hordes arrive but their stay is brief when the promised easy monsters fail to materialise, and within a week, things are back to normal.

Mark and a 6lb 4oz chub

There was a time when Throop featured strongly in the papers; a succession of angling ‘celebrities’ turned up to try their luck for a monster chub, often succeeding. The result was plain to see. Trying to find a swim a week or two later would be difficult, and the fishing would be hard, too, with the hordes of wandering anglers scaring the fish. As is often the case, without the guidance of those in the know, many of the anglers drawn by the publicity would struggle to get a bite never mind a fish and things usually returned to normal after a couple of weeks.

Some writers take a different standpoint. The best example is Martin Bowler. Although he will usually tell you what river he is fishing, this is not always the case, and even when he does tell you the name of the river he is non-specific about the stretch. Now it may be that if you know the river in question so well that you will recognise the stretch or even swim but mostly this approach avoids the descending hordes. Given that the waters he is fishing are often private and therefore not always open to day tickets then the last thing the fishery owner wants is a load of chancers turning up on the water.

Posting ont’net

A modern development is the existence of internet forums. Not only can anglers describe their catches at will, they can publish pictures too. Because there is little or no restriction on this, it is all too easy to make too much information available. Even carefully taken shots will reveal the exact swim more often than not. But it can get much worse when anglers deliberately tell all about the hot swims; sadly, the result can be a stampede for those same hot swims.

Does it really matter?

There are plenty of waters where the publicity given doesn’t actually make that much difference. Many commercial day ticket waters are going to be fairly busy anyway, and the on-site shop staff or bailiff will probably point you in the direction of the going swims, so any extra publicity simply maintains the status quo. In other cases, access may require long walks or the type of fishing is specialised so that only those who are really keen will take the trouble to fish them, and again it doesn’t make much difference.

Of course, if you do want to keep a lid on some very good fishing then you will need to weigh up whether you need to brag about it with the possibly of it being invaded by all and sundry. Many years ago, I enjoyed some extremely good fishing on a very public water where there was a consensual view that those of us locals enjoying it would not report any of our catches. Occasionally, news leaked out but I always felt that our approach had been the right one at that time. Later, the fishing deteriorated badly and it didn’t matter so much anymore.

Publicity as a diversionary tactic

One other tactic used from time to time is where an angler publicises a fish but is deliberately misleading about the venue. This goes beyond the vague ‘Southern River’ and may simply name a water other than the actual one. This often has those familiar with the named water scratching their heads, or annoyed at the resulting influx of anglers. Graham once told of an example of this where a very big bream was reported as coming from the wrong county; it was a record breaking bream from a Staffordshire mere that was reported as coming from a Cheshire mere. Graham took up the case and the record lists were eventually amended.

These days it’s possible to doctor a photo far more easily with digital tools like Photoshop so it is possible to disguise the venue. Sometimes people disguise the venue because of publicity bans from the controlling club.

Finally

Now that Dave Slater has caught the chub that may or may not have been the one known as ‘The General’ I’m just going to have to try and catch the one we call ‘Field Marshall Goering’, the whereabouts of which really is a secret…