Fishing, hunting and the anti - part one

In recent years there has been a lot of debate and discussion within the fishing world concerning the anti-angling fraternity. The high profile initially was given to the subject due mainly to the proposed bill put through Parliament to ban fox hunting, which eventually became law. Even a casual glance at any internet forum discussion indicates that anglers fall more or less into two camps. There are those who wish to totally distance themselves from hunting, believing it is barbaric and cruel, and indeed, should be banned. Then there are those who would like to see angling allied with the wider country sports alliance.

While I respect and understand the views of the former, the reality of the situation is that it’s not what we think, it’s how the mind of the anti operates that is the important issue. To the anti, fishing and hunting are one and the same. We are all blood thirsty, callous killers, who need to be stopped by whatever means possible. And the end is very much justified by the means. By attempting to distance ourselves from hunting, we are not going to score points with these people.

Now I’m not saying that we should necessarily be pro-active in our support for country sports. I accept that many anglers feel uncomfortable with these things, whether for reasons of conscience, political persuasion, or whatever. In fact, although I have a country sports background I have certainly mellowed over the years in terms of where I now stand. However, I must come back to the point again, it’s not what we think that is the issue.

Since fox hunting was banned it has not caused the various anti groups to disband. No, it has simply spurred them on to more action, with the sense of victory in their nostrils. And believe me, the fall of fox hunting will mean that angling will be targeted far more as time moves on. The truth is that fox hunting was a buffer for angling. It offered a cushion against the venom of the anti.

There is no doubt that the British way of life has changed considerably in the last 30 years. There has been a social revolution that began earlier but manifested itself in the 1960’s. This has affected every strata of society. One of the negative aspects of the social change has been the rise of the anti, as attitudes towards animals have changed.

Just for example, many of us from my generation and beyond (I’m 44) can remember the poultry that were kept in the back yard, perhaps by our grandparents, as in my case. When the family wanted chicken for lunch, out went the man who killed the bird with his own hands before bringing it in to his wife, who then proceeded to pluck and prepare the next meal at the kitchen sink. The whole family then ate it.

The advent of supermarkets and refrigeration (not to mention the big raise in standards of living and incomes) means that scenario has disappeared from the British way of life (certainly in the urban areas, where most of us live). What happens now is that the housewife visits the local store and buys a nice packet of cellophane covered chicken. All she needs to do is put it in the oven and the meal is ready.

There is no blood, no guts and no preparation involved. And no killing. At least not by the family that eats the chicken. (Let me add that I’m not being critical of our modern way of life, just pointing out how things have changed.) So for most of us there is a gulf that has developed, and we’re no longer in direct contact with the food chain.

Also, from the 60’s, there was a change in the ways animals were perceived. I remember as a kid going to watch the movie Bambi. It’s been a long time ago, but I recall the scene where the mother deer says something like ‘Danger…man in forest’. Then you hear a gun shot, the mother is dead and the poor little orphaned Bambi is left alone to fend for himself in a big bad world where humans are the only enemies.

How many people, affected by this scene, turned to vegetarianism? The effect of a cute, big-eyed baby deer surely had a subliminal play on the minds of many. The bad guys were the hunters, portrayed as cruel, ruthless, bloodthirsty killers. And the ‘humanisation’ of animals in the movies doesn’t help either. Have you noticed how they are all very likeable and have such cute voices? And I’m sure that Nemo hasn’t done our cause any good at all, as even fish have now joined the ranks of the poor little innocents at the mercy of evil man.

The animated series Animals of Farthing Wood is another example of animals being given human characteristics. It breaks down the barriers between man and mammals that have always existed within our culture and mind-set, putting us on the same level. In many cases even making animals the higher level of being. In one scene, Mr and Mrs Pheasant are crossing the road and the hen gets run over. The cock bird breaks down in an uncontrollable sob ‘My wife, my wife...she’s dead’.

The reality is that animals (or fish) don’t have the same emotional capacity as humans. In the real world, Bambi wouldn’t be pining for his mother because animals don’t have the same feelings of family affection that humans do. And Mr Pheasant wouldn’t cry for his wife. When fish spawn, it is purely and simply because of instinct. It has nothing to do with the human desire to ‘start a family’. In fact, after spawning, fish will then eat their offspring.