Swan Attack

[Jim Batty]

Hold on, cats are by far the worst examples of an animal that kills wildlife. ...

 

This is a very broad generalisation. Our cat is utterly uninterested in other wildlife -- he ignores the various duck and moorhen chicks that swim beneath his nose or parade up and down the towpath as he sits within striking distance on the bow. He's more interested in eating grass ... and puking it up on the carpets.

 

Swans can be pretty nasty. And I feel pretty terrible about the dog the OP mentioned. We have also seen swans 'stomping' on other smaller swans and geese to try and drown them.

 

I have been attacked by a swan and seen off a number of times when paddling my inflatable kayak down small backwaters in the middle of nowhere. I was initially quite reluctant to fend them off for fear of 'damaging' them. But they are ferocious and canny. They will keep coming at you from different angles to strike with their beak. And they are relentless.

 

The first time I was attacked (about this time of year) it occured to me that if I ended up in the water I would be at a huge disadvantage. Bobbing around in the river without the kayak as a barrier and the paddle as a prod, the swan would be able to get in close and give me a jolly good beaking ... and no doubt would attempt to 'stomp' my head under the water. I'm not a brilliant swimmer. When I was able to get about 20 feet from the swan I turned and paddled for what I was worth. Every 100 feet or so for a quarter mile this bird flew up behind me and tried to get at me. Until I was well away from his mate's nest.

 

If a swan comes at me now ... I head the other way!

Edited June 5, 2014 by Jim Batty

[carlt]

So, if the mods were to merge this thread about a Swan who killed a dog with the one about the guy who killed a Swan for food, who would win the popularity poll?

[little duck!]

We found that when on the move a blast of water does the trick, when stationary i have the mop to hand they don't like being threatened with that either!

I dont like them, they are aggressive beyond reason!

[WJM]

I was canoe racing on the Thames last night and saw Britain's reigning European Canoe Champion attacked by a swan! She was sufficiently bashed that she had to abandon the race and she now sports a a large stripe of bruises across her torso.

[paulstoke1975]

I'm a park keeper, swans will even chase off last years signets to make it safe for this years young, male swans are really protective. So dogs should be kept on leads around water in May-June ..

 

 

Regarding swans/ ducks/coots etc.

 

I also think fishing should be band around this time of year as it's stressful for the birds,

 

On Monday I had to pull a dead swan signet out the lake that had got fishing like wrapped around its neck that was hanging from a tree on the island in the middle if the lake,

Edited June 5, 2014 by paulstoke1975

[George94]

The side of our boat is currently under attack by both parents and their 3 little ones, they have been pecking the side of the boat and the side hatch doors for over 45 minutes now. I opened the hatch and gave them a couple of handfuls of Iams cat food (they love it & it floats), much to Zebby's dismay. I thought that would be enough to get them on their way, but no doing. They are more insistent then ever, pecking, flapping and splashing around

 

You have to stop paying the Dane-geld if you want to be rid of the Dane.

[paulstoke1975]

 

This is a very broad generalisation. Our cat is utterly uninterested in other wildlife -- he ignores the various duck and moorhen chicks that swim beneath his nose or parade up and down the towpath as he sits within striking distance on the bow. He's more interested in eating grass ... and puking it up on the carpets.

 

Swans can be pretty nasty. And I feel pretty terrible about the dog the OP mentioned. We have also seen swans 'stomping' on other smaller swans and geese to try and drown them.

 

I have been attacked by a swan and seen off a number of times when paddling my inflatable kayak down small backwaters in the middle of nowhere. I was initially quite reluctant to fend them off for fear of 'damaging' them. But they are ferocious and canny. They will keep coming at you from different angles to strike with their beak. And they are relentless.

 

The first time I was attacked (about this time of year) it occured to me that if I ended up in the water I would be at a huge disadvantage. Bobbing around in the river without the kayak as a barrier and the paddle as a prod, the swan would be able to get in close and give me a jolly good beaking ... and no doubt would attempt to 'stomp' my head under the water. I'm not a brilliant swimmer. When I was able to get about 20 feet from the swan I turned and paddled for what I was worth. Every 100 feet or so for a quarter mile this bird flew up behind me and tried to get at me. Until I was well away from his mate's nest.

 

If a swan comes at me now ... I head the other way!

[John V]

 

You have to stop paying the Dane-geld if you want to be rid of the Dane.

 

swans are vegetarian, Bettie Boo has been turning them into carnivores......beware!!!!

[paulstoke1975]

Swans are not any more dangerous than any male species under threat ,

 

 

Imagine your heavily pregnant wife sitting on a boat in the middle of a lake with a constant stream of local cider drinking scroats heading towards her,

 

You'd get all protective too I hope?

 

As the baby swans get older daddy swan gets more relaxed

[George94]

All animals are protective of their young, not just swans. Try getting near an eagle's chicks, and it will have your eyes out. A cousin of mine went too near to a tern's nest, and came back bleeding profusely after the tern pecked his head several times.

 

Gulls have taken to nesting in seaside towns in recent years and will sometimes even chase cars that they think are encroaching on their territory.

 

If we want to have wild-life in this country, we have to accept that it will be wild. Sadly, in sanitised, telly-watching Britain many people don't want inconvenient reminders of Nature, red in tooth and claw. They'd much prefer to just watch that nice Mr Attenborough bring us safe, second-hand, excitement.

 

Swans are beautiful, and our waterways would be much poorer without them.

Swans are not any more dangerous than any male species under threat ,


Imagine your heavily pregnant wife sitting on a boat in the middle of a lake with a constant stream of local cider drinking scroats heading towards her,

You'd get all protective too I hope?

As the baby swans get older daddy swan gets more relaxed

 

I suspect you mean aggressive or perhaps protective. A swan is always going to be more dangerous than, say, a pigeon because it is much bigger.

 

But otherwise you are right.

[Tigerr]

It is quite clear to me that swans should be on leads. I have no idea why the RSPB which inherits fortunes from batty old ladies doesn't invest in proper swan leads.

They are inherently dangerous and out of control. It is only a matter of time before they have someone's eye out.

Dogs should mostly be bagged, except honest working dogs, or blind dogs of course. Plus cats ought to be on long lines with bells attached.

[mattlad]

blind dogs

Shouldn't blind dogs have a white stick or maybe given a guide cat?

[Penelope]

I take the view I am venturing into the countryside when we go boating.

I am on the local wildlife's territory so it is up to me to take precautions and also to respect the natural habitat of the creatures therein.

 

Part of that respect is keeping my pooch on a leash, and not discharging harmful fluids into the canal.

 

I love being out and experiencing nature close up, and the daddy swan behaviour at this time of the year is just part of it!

 

Sad to say I kill any mozzies that dare to enter the boat.....

[jelunga]

Sorry I disagree.

 

In a confined narrow space like the towpath all dogs should be on a lead for their own protection as well as the safety of other people and animals.

 

My definition of "perfectly controlled" is "unable to invade my or my family's space without my invitation" whatever their intentions and no dog off a leash meets that requirement.

Cannot award greenies on my ipod so LIKE

[Felshampo]

This is a very broad generalisation. Our cat is utterly uninterested in other wildlife -- he ignores the various duck and moorhen chicks that swim beneath his nose or parade up and down the towpath as he sits within striking distance on the bow. He's more interested in eating grass ... and puking it up on the carpets.

 

 

 

You are right some cats are uninterested in wildlife but unfortunately there are many others that spend every night out hunting and killing. In a recent survey of all the cats in a village the average number of kills per cat was 50 per year. Thats a lot of Barn Owl food!

Edited June 6, 2014 by Felshampo

[Bettie Boo]

 

swans are vegetarian, Bettie Boo has been turning them into carnivores......beware!!!!

 

I think the ones at Braunston marina have forgotten they aren't meant to like meat. I'm telling you the absolutely love Zebby's Chicken flavor iams cat food - they can't get enough, mind you they quite fancy rice krispies as well

 

I've tried giving them grapes, apple & pear and they just aren't interested

[Starcoaster]

Swans aren't veggie, they also eat tadpoles, insects, molluscs and other opportunistic easy meals.

[John V]

Swans aren't veggie, they also eat tadpoles, insects, molluscs and other opportunistic easy meals.

 

pedant!!!! you spoiled a good joke. Huh!!! (foot stamp)

Edited June 5, 2014 by John V

[Marjorie]

It is quite clear to me that swans should be on leads. I have no idea why the RSPB which inherits fortunes from batty old ladies doesn't invest in proper swan leads.

They are inherently dangerous and out of control. It is only a matter of time before they have someone's eye out.

Dogs should mostly be bagged, except honest working dogs, or blind dogs of course. Plus cats ought to be on long lines with bells attached.

Job's a good 'un.

[pquinn]

 

This is a very broad generalisation. Our cat is utterly uninterested in other wildlife -- he ignores the various duck and moorhen chicks that swim beneath his nose or parade up and down the towpath as he sits within striking distance on the bow. He's more interested in eating grass ... and puking it up on the carpets.

 

Swans can be pretty nasty. And I feel pretty terrible about the dog the OP mentioned. We have also seen swans 'stomping' on other smaller swans and geese to try and drown them.

 

I have been attacked by a swan and seen off a number of times when paddling my inflatable kayak down small backwaters in the middle of nowhere. I was initially quite reluctant to fend them off for fear of 'damaging' them. But they are ferocious and canny. They will keep coming at you from different angles to strike with their beak. And they are relentless.

 

The first time I was attacked (about this time of year) it occured to me that if I ended up in the water I would be at a huge disadvantage. Bobbing around in the river without the kayak as a barrier and the paddle as a prod, the swan would be able to get in close and give me a jolly good beaking ... and no doubt would attempt to 'stomp' my head under the water. I'm not a brilliant swimmer. When I was able to get about 20 feet from the swan I turned and paddled for what I was worth. Every 100 feet or so for a quarter mile this bird flew up behind me and tried to get at me. Until I was well away from his mate's nest.

 

If a swan comes at me now ... I head the other way!

A jolly good beaking

 

I like that.

Edited June 5, 2014 by pquinn

[Ricco1]

The law states that a dog should be kept under control. Everybody knows that you can't reason with a dog. Yes, they can obey simple commands but their natural instincts can overide this, so they don't always respond to the command.

 

So what is needed is very simple. As dogs can only be controlled when on a lead they should be on a lead at all times, when in public places. Failure to have a dog on a lead would lead to the owner being fined. This would soon catch on, as not smoking in pubs did.

 

This might seem a bit harsh, dog owners might feel their pets are missing out. Maybe that's the case but I'm sure a dog can still have a happy life, and its owner still retain their love for it. Those not having/ not liking/ fearing dogs would be no longer be jumped on by excited out of control animals. And to me the rights of a non-dog owner, as a human being, outweigh a dog owner's claim to allow their pet more freedom.

[George94]

The law states that a dog should be kept under control. Everybody knows that you can't reason with a dog. Yes, they can obey simple commands but their natural instincts can overide this, so they don't always respond to the command.

 

So what is needed is very simple. As dogs can only be controlled when on a lead they should be on a lead at all times, when in public places. Failure to have a dog on a lead would lead to the owner being fined. This would soon catch on, as not smoking in pubs did.

 

This might seem a bit harsh, dog owners might feel their pets are missing out. Maybe that's the case but I'm sure a dog can still have a happy life, and its owner still retain their love for it. Those not having/ not liking/ fearing dogs would be no longer be jumped on by excited out of control animals. And to me the rights of a non-dog owner, as a human being, outweigh a dog owner's claim to allow their pet more freedom.

 

You might be happier living in Germany, Ricco. The Germans love regulations. Next time you meet a German, ask to see his licences. They have a licence for every conceivable activity, and your German will be pleased to show you what he is licenced to do. I don't think they have a licence for breathing yet, but I am sure it will come.

 

One reason I like boating is that in this country, we don't need a licence - yet. Let's not invite more regulation here. Let's not encroach on Germany's speciality.

[Guest]

The law states that a dog should be kept under control. Everybody knows that you can't reason with a dog. Yes, they can obey simple commands but their natural instincts can overide this, so they don't always respond to the command.

 

So what is needed is very simple. As dogs can only be controlled when on a lead they should be on a lead at all times, when in public places. Failure to have a dog on a lead would lead to the owner being fined. This would soon catch on, as not smoking in pubs did.

 

This might seem a bit harsh, dog owners might feel their pets are missing out. Maybe that's the case but I'm sure a dog can still have a happy life, and its owner still retain their love for it. Those not having/ not liking/ fearing dogs would be no longer be jumped on by excited out of control animals. And to me the rights of a non-dog owner, as a human being, outweigh a dog owner's claim to allow their pet more freedom.

I know of some humans who would be better kept on a leash in public places oh and muzzled too for good measure.....

[John V]

I know of some humans who would be better kept on a leash in public places oh and muzzled too for good measure.....

 

That was positively......catty!!

[Ricco1]

 

You might be happier living in Germany, Ricco. The Germans love regulations. Next time you meet a German, ask to see his licences. They have a licence for every conceivable activity, and your German will be pleased to show you what he is licenced to do. I don't think they have a licence for breathing yet, but I am sure it will come.

 

One reason I like boating is that in this country, we don't need a licence - yet. Let's not invite more regulation here. Let's not encroach on Germany's speciality.

 

I do agree with you to a point. I'm not one for over-regulation, it's stifling. Having said that most things are regulated, certainly things that can cause danger or distress to other people. For example there's a river I used to fish a lot. One incident of a dog getting some carelessly discarded line round its leg led to the local authority banning fishing. I choose to disregard this unfair law but every time I go I have to dodge around dog mess. Why does a single incident leading to distress for a dog create limiting local legislation whereas daily incidents of dog mess do not. I think my argument is perfectly reasonable here, logical. But invariably, I'm met with illogical responses, typical ones being that many dogs are better behaved than humans. Maybe they are, but even a complete idiot would realise that humans, as an intelligent species, make the rules, and have rights, whereas dogs do not.