Risk assessment for fishing

kingf000

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 13, 2016
Messages
2,229
Honesty boxes to pay at some fisheries dont provide track and trace details to follow up.Nor does every angler who fishes follow rules,some feel they dont apply to them and only want to knock as many fish as possible.

Nobody is condemning anyone,certainly not why I am replying.I disgaree with the whole lockdown NOT being a lockdown and allowing people to do what they want and are ignoring the Stay at home advice.This is goverments fault in the first instance as they have been soft enough to say tennis, golf, angling even sledging is a sport and allowed.
Goverment need to grow some and clamp down on the rules as thats the only way out of this.14 miles ,28 miles 40 miles,how far is too far and local.
If the government said, as some countries have, that you cannot leave your home without written permission then, as a law abiding individual, I would stick to that law, even if I personally disagree with it, provided everyone else sticks to such a rigid law and for example, members of the government don't flout it. The stay at home message is precisely because the last 9 months has shown that the general public does not know how to live their lives safely in a pandemic, never having been taught or having experienced it before. So the government apply, not a rule or law, but guidance for those who do not understand and just want to be told what to do, but allow many high risk activities, like professional football, to go ahead.
In my case I am leaving home about every 14 days to do a low risk activity, which I maintain is essential for my fitness and wellbeing. As Prof Witty has said that the virus is readily transmittable outside in the cold weather, how does my 6h a fortnight compare with what a lot of people are doing, going out for walks in busy town and city parks for an hour every day? I can't even go to post a letter at the local post box without having to cross the road a dozen times to avoid close contact with people on the footpath. Every activity needs to put in a proper context.
 

kingf000

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 13, 2016
Messages
2,229
kingf000 said:
Before I retired I spent 35 years in drug discovery and development, becoming a research and development Vice President in a major pharmaceutical company, including 20 years working on antiinfectives. I directed and managed 5 anti infective drug discovery programmes, one of which went all the way to the market, and consulted on at least 10 other projects. I have over 250 papers and patents to my name in the field of drug discovery. I also managed a vaccine programme, though that was actually for Alzheimer's. I've written and edited 4 books on the subject, organised 2 international conferences on antiinfectives and 4 others on drug discovery generally and edited a major drug discovery journal for 10 years. For 2 years I ran a school teaching people in the industry how to find and develop new drugs, and I chaired a drug discovery Wellcome Trust committee, which funded numerous anti-infective initiatives. I also consulted for one of Patrick Vallance's projects on sepsis.

Without a name this is bull sh--- as cant be proved
Do you think I'm going to give out my name after all the insults that I've received! I'm proud of what I achieved when I worked and can look behind me on the shelf or go into Google scholar whenever I want, to see by how much the 4,713 citations of my work has increased. If you don't believe it, I couldn't give a s**t.
 

glueman

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 21, 2008
Messages
4,621
Location
on the banks of the A5
Do you think I'm going to give out my name after all the insults that I've received! I'm proud of what I achieved when I worked and can look behind me on the shelf or go into Google scholar whenever I want, to see by how much the 4,713 citations of my work has increased. If you don't believe it, I couldn't give a s**t.
So why should anyone believe you. Simple isn't it No name then as far as anyone is concerned complete fiction. I happen to know extreemly well a biochemist who worked for Astra Zenn but no names
 

ohanzee

Well-known member
Joined
May 7, 2010
Messages
46,436
I would stick to that law, even if I personally disagree with it, provided everyone else sticks to such a rigid law and for example....

The above is where the consensus is spotting a hypocrisy, you are doing what millions of others are doing, finding ways to justify not doing what others are trying to.

My take is that when there are more cars on the road people are more likely to drive, when more people are seen to be doing the things they would normally do people naturally do more things they want to do.
It is perfectly safe as you have illustrated and you are allowed, but lets not kid anyone that you are somehow different from a socially distanced dog walker meeting a friend with a coffee in hand, they and you could live without it.

Even a brainless copper knows the thing missing from your risk assessment is an estimation of how essential the task is.
 

glas y dorlan

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 26, 2008
Messages
2,203
Location
mid wales
If you genuinely think that carrying a piece of paper will prevent you getting sent home or getting a fine then you’re in for a surprise should you get stopped.
Going by your logic, if a thief or burglar has done a risk assessment they’ll be home and dry if caught 🤪🤪
 

BobP

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 28, 2007
Messages
9,394
Location
Wiltshire
Assuming that as you haven't had a car accident in 50 years you won't have one a pretty stupid. You have as much chance of having an accident tomorrow if you drive as you did the first day you drove. One thing we always used to say to those who boasted that they hadn't had an accident in xx years was, "but I saw a hell of a lot in my rear view mirrors." Accidents happen out of the blue and you rarely see them coming, and even if you do they tend to happen extremely fast. By the time your brain has registered the problem it is right down your throat.

You can be trundling along minding your own business and WALLOP! which is more or less what happened to me in November '19 when I was quietly making my way to a Hampshire shoot for a day out with the dogs when this stupid woman came blasting round a blind corner on my side of the road. Luckily my reflexes are still pretty damned good or it would have been head on. As it was I ended up with the car wedged on to of an elderberry bush on a slope at about 40 degrees. I thought for a moment that the car was going to roll, but it was caught underneath by the bush and that stopped it. Damage looked a lot worse than it was, but it was two hours before I got towed off. So, don't think that just because you haven't had an accident that you won't, because one fine day.........!

Also extremely stupid to think that driving at 60 mph is safe and careful. You can die at 30 very easily, and twice as easily at 60. Just depends what you hit or what hits you.

I doubt very much that young Mr. Plod is going to take the slightest notice of your so-called risk assessment and will treat it with the disdain it deserves.

I have already determined that as this variant is 50-70% more transmissable than the original that the 2 metre gap is not enough. It's 4-5 metres as far as I'm concerned.
 
Joined
Jul 14, 2007
Messages
6,957
Location
Scotland
that you are somehow different from a socially distanced dog walker meeting a friend with a coffee in hand, they and you could live without it.
This is something whic has been niggling me about the 2 dolly birds who got a £200 fine for going 5 miles and also had a cosco or starbucks coffee in hand.Surely they stopped off to get those,Together.But of course once the papers got hold of it the police are at fault.Will people stop off for a coffee before going fishing who knows.
 

kingf000

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 13, 2016
Messages
2,229
If you genuinely think that carrying a piece of paper will prevent you getting sent home or getting a fine then you’re in for a surprise should you get stopped.
Going by your logic, if a thief or burglar has done a risk assessment they’ll be home and dry if caught 🤪🤪
Yes, as I have a written statement from the police that I am allowed to do it as you would know if you read my RA. Your analogy is bonkers as I am not breaking the law by driving 14 miles, unlike thieving.
 

glueman

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 21, 2008
Messages
4,621
Location
on the banks of the A5
Bobp 30 years back driving on snow in France and approaching a sharp blind left a car came around the bend, did not make it and slammed into the front of me. It is slow motion you see an acident that you can't avoid happening. Those that say I have not had a bump in x years so will not have one should have their licence removed
 

kingf000

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 13, 2016
Messages
2,229
This is something whic has been niggling me about the 2 dolly birds who got a £200 fine for going 5 miles and also had a cosco or starbucks coffee in hand.Surely they stopped off to get those,Together.But of course once the papers got hold of it the police are at fault.Will people stop off for a coffee before going fishing who knows.
There is no law to say that they couldn't stop off and get a coffee whilst driving in separate cars with appropriate social distancing, as take aways are allowed under the current law. I understand from the radio that the Derbyshire police have now rescinded the fine as they have found out that they were in breach of the police guidelines.
 

ohanzee

Well-known member
Joined
May 7, 2010
Messages
46,436
This is something whic has been niggling me about the 2 dolly birds who got a £200 fine for going 5 miles and also had a cosco or starbucks coffee in hand.Surely they stopped off to get those,Together.But of course once the papers got hold of it the police are at fault.Will people stop off for a coffee before going fishing who knows.

They didn't have their risk assessment :whistle:

'Essential travel' is what the police want, not 'unessential but safe travel'
 

kingf000

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 13, 2016
Messages
2,229
Bobp 30 years back driving on snow in France and approaching a sharp blind left a car came around the bend, did not make it and slammed into the front of me. It is slow motion you see an acident that you can't avoid happening. Those that say I have not had a bump in x years so will not have one should have their licence removed
The reason I wrote that is not what you infer. I'm sure that you are aware that some drivers drive aggressively whilst looking at their mobile phone. Others have taken an advanced drivers course and drive defensively, assuming that everyone else on the road is an ***** and likely to do the most stupid thing you can think of. I'm in the latter category. Doesn't mean I won't have an accident, just I minimise the risk and so am less likely than average to have an accident.
 
Joined
Jul 14, 2007
Messages
6,957
Location
Scotland
There is no law to say that they couldn't stop off and get a coffee whilst driving in separate cars with appropriate social distancing, as take aways are allowed under the current law. I understand from the radio that the Derbyshire police have now rescinded the fine as they have found out that they were in breach of the police guidelines.
I still say media pressure has been an influence on this.We can only take their words on how they got there and what they did inbetween.

As you stated on background.Does it not make common sense,the less people out and about means virus has less hosts and that the goverment should be firmer in their guidelines.A virus without a host would die out quicker than more hosts more virus.
 

glueman

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 21, 2008
Messages
4,621
Location
on the banks of the A5
There is no such thing as beeing on average less likely to have an accident. In my case in France it happened and I was not at fault,the other driver took liability due to being blinded by the sun. Accidents happen do not think you are immune
 

kingf000

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 13, 2016
Messages
2,229
They didn't have their risk assessment :whistle:

'Essential travel' is what the police want, not 'unessential but safe travel'
Hardly anything many people, especially retired people, do is essential. I've just bought my vegetable seeds on line, so I don't need to go to a shop or garden centre. Going for a walk is none essential, people can walk round their house or garden if they have one, or get a treadmill delivered. If you are taking a dog for a walk, hire a dog walker, but in reality, owning a dog is not essential and certainly getting in your car and driving with the dog is not essential when there are perfectly good walks nearby. Many people even manage to exist without a dog. Much of the shopping can be done on line, if you can get a slot, or click and collect, which is less risky than going round the shop. I would argue that going fishing is just as essential as many other activities that far more people do and are actually much more risky.
 

glas y dorlan

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 26, 2008
Messages
2,203
Location
mid wales
Yes, as I have a written statement from the police that I am allowed to do it as you would know if you read my RA. Your analogy is bonkers as I am not breaking the law by driving 14 miles, unlike thieving.
But that’s the whole point. You could be breaking the law. As for a Police statement, it’s unsigned and not a statement. It’s a record of an online conversation. A piece of toilet paper signed by God would be just as useful.
 

glueman

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 21, 2008
Messages
4,621
Location
on the banks of the A5
Risks driving,60 years of car driving a BSA before that,average over the 60 years 35,000 a year what are the chances of a bump,exactly the same as mile one.
 

mike fox

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 25, 2014
Messages
466
Location
Cheshire/West Sussex
Why don't you pass your 'Risk Assessment' on to the Angling Trust for certification. They can then pass it on to the Government. They in turn could let every angler in the country know about it through a Downing Street briefing. If that happens, then and only then shall I accept your RA as valid guidance. Until such time I shall rely on my own common sense thank you.
 

ohanzee

Well-known member
Joined
May 7, 2010
Messages
46,436
Hardly anything many people, especially retired people, do is essential. I've just bought my vegetable seeds on line, so I don't need to go to a shop or garden centre. Going for a walk is none essential, people can walk round their house or garden if they have one, or get a treadmill delivered. If you are taking a dog for a walk, hire a dog walker, but in reality, owning a dog is not essential and certainly getting in your car and driving with the dog is not essential when there are perfectly good walks nearby. Many people even manage to exist without a dog. Much of the shopping can be done on line, if you can get a slot, or click and collect, which is less risky than going round the shop. I would argue that going fishing is just as essential as many other activities that far more people do and are actually much more risky.

I would say what many retired people are doing right now is far more essential than you you going fishing.

How many pensioners can afford to follow your advice and order in a treadmill and hire a dog walker for their unnecessary dog? where do you get this stuff from.

Its either essential or not, its not a choice that you can justify with a risk assessment.
 
Last edited:

kingf000

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 13, 2016
Messages
2,229
I still say media pressure has been an influence on this.We can only take their words on how they got there and what they did inbetween.

As you stated on background.Does it not make common sense,the less people out and about means virus has less hosts and that the goverment should be firmer in their guidelines.A virus without a host would die out quicker than more hosts more virus.
It depends on what you mean by less people out. The virus spreads from one individual to another through close contact, 90-95% indoors and 5-10% outdoors. So the majority of inter-household transmission is meeting other people indoors, be it shops, work, offices, illegal raves etc. Of lesser significance is outdoor transmission. That can be reduced to virtually zero by social distancing, contact with another individual for no more than 10 minutes, mask wearing and regular hand sanitisation. Numbers of people out only becomes significant when the social distancing becomes a problem. Remember, 2 metres away you are 4 times less likely to be infected than 1 metre away. 3 metres away - 9 times, 4 metres away - 16 times etc.
 
Top