Pardon my ignorance. I had no idea that bread was bad for ducks. It always seemed the thing to do. I will certainly stop doing it now that I know.
As You_mo says, a few breadcrumbs by the side of the canal is a different situation to leaving half a loaf in the park. Bread's not actually poisonous or anything, but too much can be really bad for them. Your soul is probably safe.
Actually I bet this lady hasn't broken any law so the fine should be contested.
The council can't make stuff up as they go along. How can tossing a few crumbs for ducks to eat be considered littering in the eye of the law?
Actually I bet this lady hasn't broken any law so the fine should be contested.
The council can't make stuff up as they go along. How can tossing a few crumbs for ducks to eat be considered littering in the eye of the law?
As You_mo says, a few breadcrumbs by the side of the canal is a different situation to leaving half a loaf in the park. Bread's not actually poisonous or anything, but too much can be really bad for them. Your soul is probably safe.
Half a loaf bad enough; at our local pond people dump up to half a dozen loaves at a time, with the wrappers. Makes a dreadful mess, I would happily fine them. Actually a fine is not enough.
An article on a story from the Daily Mail showing up how 'ridiculous' Britain is, wihle the headline is utter toss, and the perfectly rational explanation can be found by reading beyond the 'OMG OUTRAGE' crap...
The article says that the warden approached her and warned her of overfeeding the dusks, and she says she complied and closed the bag - and he then gave her a ticket.
Why?
Oh of course, those who believe such nonsense will start screaming infringement of civil liberties, power-crazed wardens etc.
But somethings missing here - like all such tabloid stories, we are not getting the full story...because what we have makes no sense.
It's possible, of course, that we aren't getting the full story, though the council's efforts to put their side don't really make them look any better.
What we have makes perfect sense, though, and I see no reason to doubt it.
It's possible, of course, that we aren't getting the full story, though the council's efforts to put their side don't really make them look any better.
What we have makes perfect sense, though, and I see no reason to doubt it.
It has nothing to do with the 'councils efforts' to put their side - the paper will report what it sees fit.
Do you never wonder why the more sensationalist aspects of the story are usually at the top, and the usually brief and vague comments from the authority or organisation involved are usually at the bottom...and they are usually only a sentence or two, despite the fact that a full statement would have been issued?
If you are so happy to accept the reported version of events, I think you are stunningly naive when it comes to the practises of the media and tabloid newspapers.
i always thought you couldnt be fined for dropping biodegradable things?
Eh?
Using that logic it would be OK to discard apple cores, orange peel, banana skins, paper bags, used matches, unfiltered cigarette butts, cigar butts, used chip paper, any leftover food, ..... etc, etc.
It has nothing to do with the 'councils efforts' to put their side - the paper will report what it sees fit.
Do you never wonder why the more sensationalist aspects of the story are usually at the top, and the usually brief and vague comments from the authority or organisation involved are usually at the bottom...and they are usually only a sentence or two, despite the fact that a full statement would have been issued?
If you are so happy to accept the reported version of events, I think you are stunningly naive when it comes to the practises of the media and tabloid newspapers.
Other organs have reported more of the council's side, and it didn't come out any better.
First kids can't climb trees, then they can't play conkers - now they can't go and feed the ducks at the local park!
Well, actually, they can as they're too young to prosecute but their parents can't.:rolleyes:
To pre-empt half of the DS comedians - it's QUACKERS!
For the warden to say that it was OK for her child to throw bread for the ducks, but not her, is farcical to the point of Alice in wonderland absurdity.
I just wonder if the reaction would have been the same of the ground had been frozen, snow covered, and the lake iced over. Somehow I doubt that prat of a warden would have even been there.
I would have ripped up the "ticket" and shoved it in his face.
i always thought you couldnt be fined for dropping biodegradable things?
You can, there was a thread on here about someone being fined for throwing away an apple core, any that women in Manchester fined for dropping (or her child dropping) a Wotsit.
Comments
You naughty so and so. Not only have you partaken in an activity which causes rat infestations, but youv'e been poisoning the local duck population.
Me neither...although at my local pond it's gulls, swans and terrifying geese who get most of the goodies!
As You_mo says, a few breadcrumbs by the side of the canal is a different situation to leaving half a loaf in the park. Bread's not actually poisonous or anything, but too much can be really bad for them. Your soul is probably safe.
The council can't make stuff up as they go along. How can tossing a few crumbs for ducks to eat be considered littering in the eye of the law?
Will gardener's get done for sewing seeds next?
If they are it will be a stitch-up!
*gets coat...*
Half a loaf bad enough; at our local pond people dump up to half a dozen loaves at a time, with the wrappers. Makes a dreadful mess, I would happily fine them. Actually a fine is not enough.
The legend of JPD lives on.
Never Forget.
i like giving them salt and vinagar pringles lol
It's possible, of course, that we aren't getting the full story, though the council's efforts to put their side don't really make them look any better.
What we have makes perfect sense, though, and I see no reason to doubt it.
Or given the name and address of somebody she really dislikes!
It has nothing to do with the 'councils efforts' to put their side - the paper will report what it sees fit.
Do you never wonder why the more sensationalist aspects of the story are usually at the top, and the usually brief and vague comments from the authority or organisation involved are usually at the bottom...and they are usually only a sentence or two, despite the fact that a full statement would have been issued?
If you are so happy to accept the reported version of events, I think you are stunningly naive when it comes to the practises of the media and tabloid newspapers.
Very good points.
The words 'Go and f**k yourself you f***ing jobsworth c**t.' immediately spring to mind.
Using that logic it would be OK to discard apple cores, orange peel, banana skins, paper bags, used matches, unfiltered cigarette butts, cigar butts, used chip paper, any leftover food, ..... etc, etc.
Other organs have reported more of the council's side, and it didn't come out any better.
For the warden to say that it was OK for her child to throw bread for the ducks, but not her, is farcical to the point of Alice in wonderland absurdity.
I just wonder if the reaction would have been the same of the ground had been frozen, snow covered, and the lake iced over. Somehow I doubt that prat of a warden would have even been there.
I would have ripped up the "ticket" and shoved it in his face.
http://www.expressandstar.com/2009/11/18/duck-feeding-fine-is-dropped/
A little bit of broken Britain just got superglued back on.
You can, there was a thread on here about someone being fined for throwing away an apple core, any that women in Manchester fined for dropping (or her child dropping) a Wotsit.