As an angler for more than three decades, I was bitterly disappointed to read your story, The reel thing: bid to lure young anglers (The Herald, April 14).
For many years, I went freshwater fishing in Britain and abroad with my father and grandfather. Thankfully now, however, I get as much, if not more, pleasure just being by a river and watching nature instead of tormenting it. There is nothing more pleasurable than observing the salmon leaping.
Then, as now, I was sick of finding discarded nylon filament, either in the trees with birds entangled and throttled or submerged. I found masses of nylon at Loch Rannoch and on the banks and in the trees of the Leven. I, too, lost much nylon in the weed beds of the River Wear, though not deliberately.
Then there is the problem of swans and other birds swallowing lead shot, which poisons them; thankfully, that has been outlawed. It wasn't just environmental issues that worried me, but also animal welfare issues. My grandfather used to permit inadvertently the hook to go right down ripping out a fish's intestines, and I inadvertently hooked salmon in the tongue. This maltreatment of wildlife, coupled with the environmental damage is bad enough. But anglers take the best fish, thereby depleting the breeding stock.
I finally came to my senses and I quit this blood sport in my late thirties. If people must go fishing, I would suggest they use only single, barbless hooks and, when possible, recover all nylon line. Anglers should also use a stronger filament, thereby minimising breakages. In addition, when handling fish, they should ensure their hands are wet. Fish also should not be held in keep nets. And anglers are guilty of leaving considerable litter. The worst offenders are the coarse fisherman, some of whom are very coarse indeed.
Finally, it should be noted that unlike some anglers, fish have brains, are sensitive and have feelings. Your otherwise most excellent report omitted to say that fish are extremely sensitive to disturbance.
A P Kirk, 32 Bishops Park, Inverness.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article