| PROFESSOR BARRIE RICKARDS | |
He is author of several fishing books, including the classic work ‘Fishing For Big Pike’, co-authored with the late Ray Webb and only recently his first novel, ‘Fishers On The Green Roads’ was published. He has been an angling writer in newspapers and magazines for nigh on four decades. Barrie takes a keen interest in angling politics. Away from angling Barrie is a reader in Palaeobiology at the University of Cambridge, a Fellow of Emmanuel College and a curator of the Sedgwick Museum of Geology. |
Matters relevant to angling
I’ve continued my trawl of the nation’s newspapers and magazines looking for matters relevant to angling, just to keep us all on the ball in the wider world.
The fist thing that took my fancy was the row over fish quotas, especially of cod in the North Sea. I have often been critical of Elliot Morley for his facile statements on fisheries marine and non-marine, and on angling, but in this case, given the starting point (to which we shall return) he seems to have fought his corner rather well. The relevance to angling is simply that if the EU introduces swinging cuts in catches then the poor old cod fisherman (ie: cod angler) will catch it in the neck too – even though rod-caught catches are a drop in the ocean compared to commercial catches. And, note this, the cod angler catches edible sized fish as a rule, not baby cod that have to be returned (for the gulls to eat: mad, quite mad).
However, it took the labour MP for north Grimsby, Austin Mitchell, to get to the root of the North Sea problem. As he pointed out, the problem goes back to the UK joining the Common Market (so-called) because Britain’s North Sea fisheries were one of the prices we had to pay for membership. That dreadful Conservative Prime Minister, Edward Heath, gave the CM our fisheries. The Europeans, having more or less totally depleted their own fisheries then became free to pilfer ours, which they promptly did. Now we are reaping the harvest we deserve, and our fishermen face ruin. There is an answer, of course, though I doubt if the commonsense logic of it will appeal to those in government at present.
Have you had a licence reminder from the Environment Agency trying to persuade you to buy your licence by direct debit. Frankly, I wouldn’t touch this with a barge pole, because direct debits seem to go wrong so often. Wasn’t it last year that they tried to get us to buy via the internet? And was that efficient? Personally, I’ll wait until its working if I bother at all. The Pot Office may be ignorant of angling, but by pushing last year’s licences over the counter and saying “copy this times two”, they can’t go far wrong. I’m being a stick-in-the-mud you say? Not a bit of it. I have two names on my licence: Barrie and Rickards. When the licence reminder came this year both were incorrectly spelt! The direct debit plea is now in the dustbin.
Although some anglers whinge about the Countryside Alliance, and especially about its Gone Fishing section led by Bob Jones and Charles Jardine, I have to say that the CA is not only about hunting. I have just been going through their new magazine ‘Real Countryside’, and in its 67 pages I can find almost nothing on hunting – plenty on birds, flowers, countryside activities including fishing, but not much at all on hunting. The CA really is in for the long haul on the countryside, and some of us ought to remember that a lot of our fishing depends on farmers.
The magazine referred to also has a superb article by countryman/farmer Robin Page. He and I have crossed swords from time to time about his views on angling, but I met him on a radio programme over Christmas so we were able to swap notes a little. His article is entitled ‘Where have all the conservationists gone?’: he is referring to bodies like the RSPB, the wildlife trusts and the National Trust. Robin argues that most country sports conserve the environment in spectacular fashion, so why do the RSPB, etc, not support them positively, including the CA. Robin reckons these bodies are keeping their heads down, and I agree with him. It is surely outrageous that they do not support real conservationist movements in public.
But what happens if, like Professor David Bellamy (or, indeed, Robin Page) you do so? David Bellamy has spoken often about how angling is a good conservationist movement. Well, according to Robin Page people like this “disappear from the BBC”. When was the last time you saw a presentation by the brilliant David Bellamy? (Apparently he talks about his disappearance from the BBC in his autobiography “Jolly Green Giant” (must get a copy). My general point from all this is that many of the bodies I have mentioned in previous articles, and in this one, are opposed to angling. Some of them are powerful bodies and we must prepare.
A little bit on the hunting bill and its relevance to angling. Dr Douglas Wise, of my own University of Cambridge, has recently pointed out that the ‘utility’ and ‘least suffering’ tests to be incorporated into the hunting bill actually put at risk a great deal of farming, and could be applied to angling and shooting. The word ‘utility’ excludes economic factors, environmental factors, and social or cultural factors; and, of course, those have always been part of the angler’s case. Dr. Wise ends his article with the following words, “Unless we get these tests right, there will be those who will take the tests and seek to apply them to other types of animal and other types of activity”. So those anglers who think angling is morally defensible whereas hunting is not, really ought to look at their position again if they do love angling.
The Chattering Classes
It has been argued that the chattering classes really rule the UK, not the government of the day whatever its political colour. I believe this to be true myself. The pressures put on government by the collective view of the chattering classes are enormous (eg: after the Dunblane massacre). It goes on all the time. Who are or what is the chattering class? Well it includes senior professionals in all spheres of activity and it overlaps with journalists (senior editors) and politicians.
On a weekly basis I dine regularly with them – senior lawyers, medics, judges, politicians, business people. It happens to be part of my job. Politically, some of them are socialists, although most of these are champagne socialists, a lot are liberals (or whatever they call themselves these days) and a small proportion are conservatives. What is the relevance to angling? Well, almost al of them are pro-game fishing, neutral/positive on sea angling (they often mackerel fished as children from their parents’ yacht), but they are against coarse fishing. Or, to put it more accurately, they argue that if fox hunting is cruel then coarse fishing is worse, because the fish is returned to the water and is not eaten. On a daily basis I am told that coarse fishing is wrong. And we see this in the media. It’s not just the Max Hastings (a salmon angler) sounding off, it’s a recent editorial in the Telegraph, and it’s the brilliant countryside columnist R.W.F. Poole. I’ll deal with the last as an example, although I have to say that I do not think R.W.F. Poole is against angling, but he is effecting comparisons with his own sport of hunting.
He says “the fish on the hook wants only one thing: to escape” Sounds good, but it’s wrong. If that is the case, then why does a pike, which has grabbed your roach and is not hooked, pull like billy-ho until it sees you, when it lets go. All it has to do, at any stage, is let go. But it doesn’t. The truth is that the pike, like so many other fish species, expects to pull for its supper occasionally. They may be puzzled, but they are not having their flight restricted as RWF thinks, and they only realise something is ‘wrong’ when, at the last minute, they see you. RWF also implies that ‘hours imprisoned in a keepnet’ may not be good for them. It certainly does them no harm either physically or psychologically or they would not feed within minutes of being returned to the water from a net! RWF also mentions the RSPCA’s Medway report (not by name as he’d forgotten it) but as with so many he misrepresents its findings.
For RWF’s sake I’ll remind him that the report only gave the fish the benefit of the doubt: and that was on the basis of scientific research subsequently withdrawn by its author. There is another detailed analysis of all the world’s literature on fish and pain, (or lack of it) and it concludes quite clearly that not only is there no evidence that fish feel pain, but it is highly probable that they do not. If someone as fair-minded on country matters as RWF Poole can get it so wrong, then think what happens with more gullible people around.
The cuddly bunny brigade
There was a recent report recommending a national culling of rabbits, but the cuddly bunny brigade kicked up such a fuss it seems likely not to go ahead. To me this is almost incomprehensible. Bunnies are good eating and we would not need large scale culls, or mixi, if wild rabbits featured again on the butchers’ slabs (I buy mine from a market stall, so some people have it right!). So how likely is it, really, that there’ll ever be a legal cormorant cull? Cull pike on a park lake because they are supposedly eating the ducks, oh sure, but cull cormorants because they are devastating our aquatic eco-system – no way.
Charles Clover, another countryman, in an otherwise enjoyable article on angling (coarse and game) wrote “It does not reward skill, only persistence and luck”. If that were true we’d have no consistently successful anglers, almost all of whom lack patience and persistence. He disproves his own case a few paragraphs lower down by describing the great successes of his wife, who is clearly more skilful than he is. This idea of luck being the prime factor harks back to pre-Walker days. I thought we’d got over it. Maybe C.C was joking. Maybe not.
Zander clanger and ‘deathray’
I’ve just been reading an article in Anglers’ Mail on zander. According to Thomas Petch and Gary Newan, Mail reporters, zander have been ‘present’ in this country for over 40 years. Well, er, sorry guys if you’d said 140 you’d be nearer the mark. Detail is in the book Neville Fickling and I did called ‘Zander’. Journalists are supposed to do research guys, come on!
A spokeswoman for DEFRA (some pronounce it ‘deathray’) says “..British Waterways culls them on canals, but we’re not aware of any problems on rivers”. Well, spokeswoman, try a bit of research. Try ‘Zander’. It’s been like this since the early days of the zander conspiracy: instant experts everywhere, real experts ignored.
Another AM story: “The future of angling looks secure after Rural Affairs Minister Alan Michael publicly stated it wouldn’t be affected by the government’s new hunting bill.” Well, er, Dr. Wise doesn’t agree with you, Mr. Michael.
Redmire monster – carp that is…
As most people know, night fishing in France is not allowed, and it seems, according to Carp Talk, that moves to have a trial period of night fishing have hit snags. The French regions voted against the trial. I mean, why try something new? Before we all knock the French (and I would not hesitate normally) it is worth reminding ourselves that night fishing in this country was banned by many clubs in the 1950s. Also in Carp Talk over Christmas a splendid article by Chris Ball on Redmire Pool and its monsters (carp I mean, not carp anglers). Chris draws attention to the Eddie Price photograph of a truly monstrous carp in the weeds. It always puzzled me that the anglers involved in this observation didn’t do a little more about it. After all the weed is clear in the picture. Its species is known. Its size was known and some measurements of the fish could have been made from this scale. Or is the story better left as it is?
Richard Caborn, the Sports Minister, gave Angling Times an interview published on the last day of 2002. It was a wholly wishy-washy, evasive interview, especially on cormorants, and to be frank, I’d rather put my angling faith in the current opposition party who, quite simply, do not make a fuss about angling at all.
Blue Peter presenter planned assault on Prince Charles
Finally on the political front, just to cheer you all up, the Countryside Alliance released a story of a Blue Peter presenter who leads a group of hunt saboteurs planning to knock Prince William off his horse. It does not seem to occur to them that serious injury might result (or does it?). This is the kind of group which we’ll have after anglers if the government’s hunting bill goes through. Indeed, there have already been instances of serious assault on elderly anglers. And the police don’t really seem to do a lot. Maybe they are not yet empowered to do much?
Patience with the NAA, praise for the SAA
I am being patient but I am still waiting for leadership and action from the National Anglers Alliance. A few statements to the non-angling press wouldn’t go amiss now and again. The Specialist Anglers Alliance is very active (so support them) but some of their activities have to go through NAA, naturally.
