Am 19.03.2024 um 12:10 schrieb Marland:
> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>> In message <p22ivipqbpijvollsd2l991q3rou23edbs@4ax.com>, at 03:38:14 on
>> Tue, 19 Mar 2024, Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com>
>> remarked:
>>> On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 15:54:31 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 13:56:38 +0000
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>> Anyway, it floated to the bank and eventually, about a day later,
>>>>> someone unknown fished(sic) it out and put it on the grass verge. It
>>>>> then took around three days for a suitably qualified person to come and
>>>>> collect it. (I know all this, because I'd called the people responsible
>>>>> the first day).
>>>>
>>>> You must have fussy foxes where you live. It would be gone here within a few
>>>> hours.
>>>>
>>> If cats, gulls, rats etc. don't beat them to it.
>>> <snip>
>>
>> I wonder why you institutionally refuse to believe me. The fish was
>> intact the whole time (I've got photos if you really insist on keeping
>> digging).
>
> I don’t think people are disbelieving you, just expressing surprise that
> natural predators did not avail themselves of an easy sourced meal which
> usually happens quite quickly.

Predators usually don't eat perished prey. Large scavengers like
Vultures are rare in the UK.

On 19/03/2024 11:32, Rolf Mantel wrote:
> Am 19.03.2024 um 12:10 schrieb Marland:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <p22ivipqbpijvollsd2l991q3rou23edbs@4ax.com>, at 03:38:14 on
>>> Tue, 19 Mar 2024, Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com>
>>> remarked:
>>>> On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 15:54:31 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 13:56:38 +0000
>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> Anyway, it floated to the bank and eventually, about a day later,
>>>>>> someone unknown fished(sic) it out and put it on the grass verge. It
>>>>>> then took around three days for a suitably qualified person to
>>>>>> come and
>>>>>> collect it. (I know all this, because I'd called the people
>>>>>> responsible
>>>>>> the first day).
>>>>>
>>>>> You must have fussy foxes where you live. It would be gone here
>>>>> within a few
>>>>> hours.
>>>>>
>>>> If cats, gulls, rats etc. don't beat them to it.
>>>> <snip>
>>>
>>> I wonder why you institutionally refuse to believe me. The fish was
>>> intact the whole time (I've got photos if you really insist on keeping
>>> digging).
>>
>> I don’t think people are disbelieving you, just expressing surprise that
>> natural predators did not avail themselves of an easy sourced meal which
>> usually happens quite quickly.
>
> Predators usually don't eat perished prey.  Large scavengers like
> Vultures are rare in the UK.
>

Plenty of other scavengers, various members of the corvid family for
example.
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Rolf Mantel <news@hartig-mantel.de> wrote:
> Am 19.03.2024 um 12:10 schrieb Marland:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <p22ivipqbpijvollsd2l991q3rou23edbs@4ax.com>, at 03:38:14 on
>>> Tue, 19 Mar 2024, Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com>
>>> remarked:
>>>> On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 15:54:31 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 13:56:38 +0000
>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> Anyway, it floated to the bank and eventually, about a day later,
>>>>>> someone unknown fished(sic) it out and put it on the grass verge. It
>>>>>> then took around three days for a suitably qualified person to come and
>>>>>> collect it. (I know all this, because I'd called the people responsible
>>>>>> the first day).
>>>>>
>>>>> You must have fussy foxes where you live. It would be gone here within a few
>>>>> hours.
>>>>>
>>>> If cats, gulls, rats etc. don't beat them to it.
>>>> <snip>
>>>
>>> I wonder why you institutionally refuse to believe me. The fish was
>>> intact the whole time (I've got photos if you really insist on keeping
>>> digging).
>>
>> I don’t think people are disbelieving you, just expressing surprise that
>> natural predators did not avail themselves of an easy sourced meal which
>> usually happens quite quickly.
>
> Predators usually don't eat perished prey. Large scavengers like
> Vultures are rare in the UK.
>
>

We have a few Carrion eating birds though and while not as physically large
like a vulture are large enough. Vultures have devolved to be large as the
animal carcasses they are scavenging are also large. We don’t have many
large wild animals in the UK so our Crows and Seagulls and similar birds
dispose of the ones that are common without too much trouble assisted by
Raptors such as Buzzards or Red Kites who will eat Carrion if it is
suitable to supplement what they catch live. A Red Kite started to
dismember a dead lamb in the field next to us a few weeks ago.,the eyes go
first.
Larger animals like deer, badgers and in certain areas Wild Boar will be
Fox Food,
and some domestic cats are surprisingly unfussy particularly one that has
been acquired from a rescue shelter and at some stage in its life has lived
a bit feral.
Something to remember when you see someone giving tiddles a kiss in the
morning when it has come back in through the Catflap.

GH

In message <l5ta4eF1lp9U1@mid.individual.net>, at 11:10:06 on Tue, 19
Mar 2024, Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>> In message <p22ivipqbpijvollsd2l991q3rou23edbs@4ax.com>, at 03:38:14 on
>> Tue, 19 Mar 2024, Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com>
>> remarked:
>>> On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 15:54:31 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 13:56:38 +0000
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>> Anyway, it floated to the bank and eventually, about a day later,
>>>>> someone unknown fished(sic) it out and put it on the grass verge. It
>>>>> then took around three days for a suitably qualified person to come and
>>>>> collect it. (I know all this, because I'd called the people responsible
>>>>> the first day).
>>>>
>>>> You must have fussy foxes where you live. It would be gone here
>>>>within a few
>>>> hours.
>>>>
>>> If cats, gulls, rats etc. don't beat them to it.
>>> <snip>
>>
>> I wonder why you institutionally refuse to believe me. The fish was
>> intact the whole time (I've got photos if you really insist on keeping
>> digging).
>
>I don’t think people are disbelieving you,

They have an awkward way of putting it then.

>just expressing surprise that
>natural predators did not avail themselves of an easy sourced meal which
>usually happens quite quickly.

Perhaps because it was in an area with almost constant human footfall,
at least in the hours of daylight.

>Perhaps it had died from some disease and was emitting a certain odour or
>other sign and those creatures who usually can handle far less savoury
>flesh than humans were alerted that in this case
>eating it would be a health risk.
>
>No need to Carp on about it.
>
>GH

--
Roland Perry

On 19 Mar 2024 11:10:06 GMT
Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> wrote:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>> In message <p22ivipqbpijvollsd2l991q3rou23edbs@4ax.com>, at 03:38:14 on
>> Tue, 19 Mar 2024, Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com>
>> remarked:
>>> On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 15:54:31 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 13:56:38 +0000
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>> Anyway, it floated to the bank and eventually, about a day later,
>>>>> someone unknown fished(sic) it out and put it on the grass verge. It
>>>>> then took around three days for a suitably qualified person to come and
>>>>> collect it. (I know all this, because I'd called the people responsible
>>>>> the first day).
>>>>
>>>> You must have fussy foxes where you live. It would be gone here within a
>few
>>>> hours.
>>>>
>>> If cats, gulls, rats etc. don't beat them to it.
>>> <snip>
>>
>> I wonder why you institutionally refuse to believe me. The fish was
>> intact the whole time (I've got photos if you really insist on keeping
>> digging).
>
>I don’t think people are disbelieving you, just expressing surprise that
>natural predators did not avail themselves of an easy sourced meal which
>usually happens quite quickly.
>Perhaps it had died from some disease and was emitting a certain odour or
>other sign and those creatures who usually can handle far less savoury
>flesh than humans were alerted that in this case
>eating it would be a health risk.

Given the foxes around here are quite happy to dine out on rotting food in
bins I suspect they'd have nabbed it. Perhaps urban foxes have a hardier
digestive system than their country cousins.

On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 13:17:28 +0000
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>In message <l5ta4eF1lp9U1@mid.individual.net>, at 11:10:06 on Tue, 19
>Mar 2024, Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> remarked:
>>Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>> I wonder why you institutionally refuse to believe me. The fish was
>>> intact the whole time (I've got photos if you really insist on keeping
>>> digging).
>>
>>I don’t think people are disbelieving you,
>
>They have an awkward way of putting it then.

I hate to say it roland but your ability to follow a thread seems to be
somewhat lacking these days. You seem to read between lines when there's
nothing there and miss obvious stuff that is.

On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 12:32:17 +0100
Rolf Mantel <news@hartig-mantel.de> wrote:
>Am 19.03.2024 um 12:10 schrieb Marland:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <p22ivipqbpijvollsd2l991q3rou23edbs@4ax.com>, at 03:38:14 on
>>> Tue, 19 Mar 2024, Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com>
>>> remarked:
>>>> On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 15:54:31 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 13:56:38 +0000
>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> Anyway, it floated to the bank and eventually, about a day later,
>>>>>> someone unknown fished(sic) it out and put it on the grass verge. It
>>>>>> then took around three days for a suitably qualified person to come and
>>>>>> collect it. (I know all this, because I'd called the people responsible
>>>>>> the first day).
>>>>>
>>>>> You must have fussy foxes where you live. It would be gone here within a
>few
>>>>> hours.
>>>>>
>>>> If cats, gulls, rats etc. don't beat them to it.
>>>> <snip>
>>>
>>> I wonder why you institutionally refuse to believe me. The fish was
>>> intact the whole time (I've got photos if you really insist on keeping
>>> digging).
>>
>> I don’t think people are disbelieving you, just expressing surprise that
>> natural predators did not avail themselves of an easy sourced meal which
>> usually happens quite quickly.
>
>Predators usually don't eat perished prey. Large scavengers like
>Vultures are rare in the UK.

Fun fact - human stomach acid is almost as strong as that of vultures and
way stronger than all the other apes and most mammals. Presumably we did our
own scavanging back in the day.

On 18/03/2024 17:37, Marland wrote:
> Many years ago a mate who was a bit of a sod used to buy a load of goods
> at B&Q and wheel the trolley load home, he would then phone the recovery
> number and inform them there was an abandoned trolley on the pavement near
> his address which needed collection.

One day they catch him on CCTV and charge him.

JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:
> On 18/03/2024 17:37, Marland wrote:
>> Many years ago a mate who was a bit of a sod used to buy a load of goods
>> at B&Q and wheel the trolley load home, he would then phone the recovery
>> number and inform them there was an abandoned trolley on the pavement near
>> his address which needed collection.
>
>
> One day they catch him on CCTV and charge him.
>
>
>

I doubt he still needs trolley loads of DIY stuff, does anyone who is
doing serious home refurbishment still use B&Q ? I would have thought most
would be using Screwfix or Toolstation
nowadays. Last time I looked the B&Q website was an awkward mess to
navigate.

……. Has a quick look, a bit better than it was but nothing exceptional.

GH

On 19/03/2024 15:39, JMB99 wrote:
> On 18/03/2024 17:37, Marland wrote:
>>   Many years ago a mate who was a bit of a sod used to buy a load of
>> goods
>> at B&Q and wheel the trolley load home, he would then phone the recovery
>> number and inform them there was an abandoned trolley on the pavement
>> near
>> his address which needed collection.
>
> One day they catch him on CCTV and charge him.

With what: littering? The phone call should be ample proof that the sod
didn't intend to deprive the owners of their property permanently.

In message <l5tquoF478qU1@mid.individual.net>, at 15:57:13 on Tue, 19
Mar 2024, Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> remarked:
>>> Many years ago a mate who was a bit of a sod used to buy a load of goods
>>> at B&Q and wheel the trolley load home, he would then phone the recovery
>>> number and inform them there was an abandoned trolley on the pavement near
>>> his address which needed collection.
>>
>> One day they catch him on CCTV and charge him.
>
> I doubt he still needs trolley loads of DIY stuff, does anyone who is
>doing serious home refurbishment still use B&Q ?

Screwfix and toolstation don't do big stuff like sheets of wood or
plasterboard, or even skirting board etc. They also have a very limited
selection of paints. Not much in the way of tiling (floor wall), and
probably no outdoor hard landscaping materials. These are things I still
go to B&Q for. Also things like lawnmowers or garden furniture from time
to time.

>I would have thought most would be using Screwfix or Toolstation
>nowadays. Last time I looked the B&Q website was an awkward mess to
>navigate.

Yes, the B&Q website has always been a car crash, which is why I go to
their store!
--
Roland Perry

In message <utcdg7$to07$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:11:51 on Tue, 19 Mar
2024, Certes <Certes@example.org> remarked:
>On 19/03/2024 15:39, JMB99 wrote:
>> On 18/03/2024 17:37, Marland wrote:
>>>   Many years ago a mate who was a bit of a sod used to buy a load of
>>>goods at B&Q and wheel the trolley load home, he would then phone
>>>the recovery number and inform them there was an abandoned trolley
>>>on the pavement near his address which needed collection.

>> One day they catch him on CCTV and charge him.
>
>With what: littering?

Fly tipping, obviously.

>The phone call should be ample proof that the sod
>didn't intend to deprive the owners of their property permanently.

Wrong law.
--
Roland Perry

In message <utc8tr$smnq$1@dont-email.me>, at 14:53:47 on Tue, 19 Mar
2024, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>On 19 Mar 2024 11:10:06 GMT
>Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> wrote:
>>Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <p22ivipqbpijvollsd2l991q3rou23edbs@4ax.com>, at 03:38:14 on
>>> Tue, 19 Mar 2024, Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com>
>>> remarked:
>>>> On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 15:54:31 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 13:56:38 +0000
>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> Anyway, it floated to the bank and eventually, about a day later,
>>>>>> someone unknown fished(sic) it out and put it on the grass verge. It
>>>>>> then took around three days for a suitably qualified person to come and
>>>>>> collect it. (I know all this, because I'd called the people responsible
>>>>>> the first day).
>>>>>
>>>>> You must have fussy foxes where you live. It would be gone here within a
>>few
>>>>> hours.
>>>>>
>>>> If cats, gulls, rats etc. don't beat them to it.
>>>> <snip>
>>>
>>> I wonder why you institutionally refuse to believe me. The fish was
>>> intact the whole time (I've got photos if you really insist on keeping
>>> digging).
>>
>>I don’t think people are disbelieving you, just expressing surprise that
>>natural predators did not avail themselves of an easy sourced meal which
>>usually happens quite quickly.
>>Perhaps it had died from some disease and was emitting a certain odour or
>>other sign and those creatures who usually can handle far less savoury
>>flesh than humans were alerted that in this case
>>eating it would be a health risk.
>
>Given the foxes around here are quite happy to dine out on rotting food in
>bins I suspect they'd have nabbed it. Perhaps urban foxes have a hardier
>digestive system than their country cousins.

Did you not get the memo that WE DON'T HAVE ANY URBAN FOXES ?
--
Roland Perry

In message <utc90j$sn9g$1@dont-email.me>, at 14:55:15 on Tue, 19 Mar
2024, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 13:17:28 +0000
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>In message <l5ta4eF1lp9U1@mid.individual.net>, at 11:10:06 on Tue, 19
>>Mar 2024, Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> remarked:
>>>Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>> I wonder why you institutionally refuse to believe me. The fish was
>>>> intact the whole time (I've got photos if you really insist on keeping
>>>> digging).
>>>
>>>I don’t think people are disbelieving you,
>>
>>They have an awkward way of putting it then.
>
>I hate to say it roland but your ability to follow a thread seems to be
>somewhat lacking these days. You seem to read between lines when there's
>nothing there and miss obvious stuff that is.

Speak for yourself (see also urban foxes).
--
Roland Perry

On 19/03/2024 16:38, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <utcdg7$to07$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:11:51 on Tue, 19 Mar
> 2024, Certes <Certes@example.org> remarked:
>> On 19/03/2024 15:39, JMB99 wrote:
>>> On 18/03/2024 17:37, Marland wrote:
>>>>   Many years ago a mate who was a bit of a sod used to buy a load of
>>>> goods  at B&Q and wheel the trolley load home, he would then phone
>>>> the recovery  number and inform them there was an abandoned trolley
>>>> on the pavement  near  his address which needed collection.
>
>>>  One day they catch him on CCTV and charge him.
>>
>> With what: littering?
>
> Fly tipping, obviously.

Same thing, and having arranged for its collection should be a defence.

>> The phone call should be ample proof that the sod
>> didn't intend to deprive the owners of their property permanently.
>
> Wrong law.

On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 17:18:33 +0000, Certes wrote:
> On 19/03/2024 16:38, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <utcdg7$to07$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:11:51 on Tue, 19 Mar
>> 2024, Certes <Certes@example.org> remarked:
>>>>  One day they catch him on CCTV and charge him.
>>>
>>> With what: littering?
>>
>> Fly tipping, obviously.
>
> Same thing, and having arranged for its collection should be a defence.

If he abandoned the trolley, that's fly tipping. If he didn't abandon it,
but told the collection service it was abandoned so they wold collect it,
that's obtaining services by deception. And he can't claim it both ways,
that's perjury.

It's highly unlikely anyone would bother to prosecute. But if he was
annoying enough they might.

Mike

Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
> In message <l5tquoF478qU1@mid.individual.net>, at 15:57:13 on Tue, 19
> Mar 2024, Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> remarked:
>>>> Many years ago a mate who was a bit of a sod used to buy a load of goods
>>>> at B&Q and wheel the trolley load home, he would then phone the recovery
>>>> number and inform them there was an abandoned trolley on the pavement near
>>>> his address which needed collection.
>>>
>>> One day they catch him on CCTV and charge him.
>>
>> I doubt he still needs trolley loads of DIY stuff, does anyone who is
>> doing serious home refurbishment still use B&Q ?
>
> Screwfix and toolstation don't do big stuff like sheets of wood or
> plasterboard, or even skirting board etc. They also have a very limited
> selection of paints. Not much in the way of tiling (floor wall), and
> probably no outdoor hard landscaping materials. These are things I still
> go to B&Q for. Also things like lawnmowers or garden furniture from time
> to time.
>
>> I would have thought most would be using Screwfix or Toolstation
>> nowadays. Last time I looked the B&Q website was an awkward mess to
>> navigate.
>
> Yes, the B&Q website has always been a car crash, which is why I go to
> their store.

The. nearest is a bit of hike for us especially as I no longer have instant
access to a large vehicle for big stuff, there is a local builders Merchant
closer which I can pop along to and they will deliver on their regular
round if it is too big ,they recently went online so like Screwfix I can
browse, check stock
and pay online so no wasted journey.
, Tiles from one of the specialist ones
like Topps. Mowers I don’t buy that often, the Bosch Cordless must be 15
years old now and the battery is still adequate though it has lost some
capacity, think I got that from Homebase.
Paint varies , if is for a large quantity we use Brewers but we are also
fortunate to have a proper old fashioned family owned we sell everything
Hardware Store a few miles away who keep a good range and have a mixing
facility. Cost more than the nearest superstore but if you knock off the
fuel bill and value your time it is often worth it , more pleasant
shopping experience as well . There is hardly a week goes by that I don’t
find some excuse to visit them rather than Screwfix or one of the chains.
Their kind is quite rare now.
<https://www.caxtondecor.com>

GH

In message <utchd9$ulq6$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:18:33 on Tue, 19 Mar
2024, Certes <Certes@example.org> remarked:
>On 19/03/2024 16:38, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <utcdg7$to07$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:11:51 on Tue, 19 Mar
>>2024, Certes <Certes@example.org> remarked:
>>> On 19/03/2024 15:39, JMB99 wrote:
>>>> On 18/03/2024 17:37, Marland wrote:
>>>>>   Many years ago a mate who was a bit of a sod used to buy a load
>>>>>of goods  at B&Q and wheel the trolley load home, he would then
>>>>>phone the recovery  number and inform them there was an abandoned
>>>>>trolley on the pavement  near  his address which needed collection.
>>
>>>>  One day they catch him on CCTV and charge him.
>>>
>>> With what: littering?

>> Fly tipping, obviously.
>
>Same thing, and having arranged for its collection should be a defence.

If you say so, but it isn't.

>>> The phone call should be ample proof that the sod
>>> didn't intend to deprive the owners of their property permanently.
>> Wrong law.
>

--
Roland Perry

On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 17:52:55 -0000 (UTC), Mike Humphrey
<mail@michaelhumphrey.me.uk> wrote:

>On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 17:18:33 +0000, Certes wrote:
>> On 19/03/2024 16:38, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> In message <utcdg7$to07$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:11:51 on Tue, 19 Mar
>>> 2024, Certes <Certes@example.org> remarked:
>>>>>  One day they catch him on CCTV and charge him.
>>>>
>>>> With what: littering?
>>>
>>> Fly tipping, obviously.
>>
>> Same thing, and having arranged for its collection should be a defence.
>
>If he abandoned the trolley, that's fly tipping. If he didn't abandon it,
>but told the collection service it was abandoned so they wold collect it,
>that's obtaining services by deception.
>
Fraud by false representation [s.2 Fraud Act 2006]. Obtaining by
deception would apply to obtaining the trolley by deceit (e.g. "Yes, I
will bring it back.").

>And he can't claim it both ways, that's perjury.
>
That is when you give false witness to/in a court. It doesn't
generally apply to the accused.

>It's highly unlikely anyone would bother to prosecute. But if he was
>annoying enough they might.
>
A lot of people wonder why they thought that when find themselves in
the dock.

On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 12:02:44 +0000, Graeme Wall
<rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>On 19/03/2024 11:32, Rolf Mantel wrote:
>> Am 19.03.2024 um 12:10 schrieb Marland:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <p22ivipqbpijvollsd2l991q3rou23edbs@4ax.com>, at 03:38:14 on
>>>> Tue, 19 Mar 2024, Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com>
>>>> remarked:
>>>>> On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 15:54:31 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 13:56:38 +0000
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> Anyway, it floated to the bank and eventually, about a day later,
>>>>>>> someone unknown fished(sic) it out and put it on the grass verge. It
>>>>>>> then took around three days for a suitably qualified person to
>>>>>>> come and
>>>>>>> collect it. (I know all this, because I'd called the people
>>>>>>> responsible
>>>>>>> the first day).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You must have fussy foxes where you live. It would be gone here
>>>>>> within a few
>>>>>> hours.
>>>>>>
>>>>> If cats, gulls, rats etc. don't beat them to it.
>>>>> <snip>
>>>>
>>>> I wonder why you institutionally refuse to believe me. The fish was
>>>> intact the whole time (I've got photos if you really insist on keeping
>>>> digging).
>>>
>>> I don’t think people are disbelieving you, just expressing surprise that
>>> natural predators did not avail themselves of an easy sourced meal which
>>> usually happens quite quickly.
>>
>> Predators usually don't eat perished prey.  Large scavengers like
>> Vultures are rare in the UK.
>>
>
>Plenty of other scavengers, various members of the corvid family for
>example.
>
Plus red kites who in past centuries used to take care of edible
rubbish in towns.

On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 14:56:19 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com
wrote:

>On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 12:32:17 +0100
>Rolf Mantel <news@hartig-mantel.de> wrote:
>>Am 19.03.2024 um 12:10 schrieb Marland:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <p22ivipqbpijvollsd2l991q3rou23edbs@4ax.com>, at 03:38:14 on
>>>> Tue, 19 Mar 2024, Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com>
>>>> remarked:
>>>>> On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 15:54:31 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 13:56:38 +0000
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> Anyway, it floated to the bank and eventually, about a day later,
>>>>>>> someone unknown fished(sic) it out and put it on the grass verge. It
>>>>>>> then took around three days for a suitably qualified person to come and
>>>>>>> collect it. (I know all this, because I'd called the people responsible
>>>>>>> the first day).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You must have fussy foxes where you live. It would be gone here within a
>>few
>>>>>> hours.
>>>>>>
>>>>> If cats, gulls, rats etc. don't beat them to it.
>>>>> <snip>
>>>>
>>>> I wonder why you institutionally refuse to believe me. The fish was
>>>> intact the whole time (I've got photos if you really insist on keeping
>>>> digging).
>>>
>>> I don’t think people are disbelieving you, just expressing surprise that
>>> natural predators did not avail themselves of an easy sourced meal which
>>> usually happens quite quickly.
>>
>>Predators usually don't eat perished prey. Large scavengers like
>>Vultures are rare in the UK.
>
>Fun fact - human stomach acid is almost as strong as that of vultures and
>way stronger than all the other apes and most mammals. Presumably we did our
>own scavanging back in the day.
>
Maybe more to do with being an omnivore? One creature's indigestible
food can be another's tasty snack.

On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 09:19:44 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com
wrote:

>On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 03:46:47 +0000
>Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 09:14:59 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com
>>wrote:
>>
>>>I'm not often left speechless but last nights C5 program about the tube
>>>managed it. LU left 200 people in 40C heat for at least 2 hours in a train
>>>stopped in a tunnel in order to try and rescue a dog that had run down the
>>>tunnel. Words genuinely failed me but I think it pretty much sums up
>>everything
>>>thats wrong with the state apparatus in this country and the fucked up
>>>priorities of the morons that work in it.
>>>
>>>I'm waiting for the day someone sues the arse off LU/TfL when there's a
>>serious
>>>issue with a passenger caused by something like this.
>>>
>>>As for the total cockwomble laughably called the "driver", 60K a year for
>>>that waste of space? God help us.
>>>
>>Until you catch or find it then you don't know what piece of equipment
>>or cabling it might get tangled up with or damaged along with it if it
>>gets incinerated.
>
>Irrelevant. The train had power until the window licker in the drivers seat
>disabled it. She should have got the train to the platform first then worried
>about the mutt.
>
>Also using your rationale it could start a fire in the tunnel so there's even
>more reason for getting the train out of it.
>
If it is ahead of you then you don't leave the current platform.

On 19 Mar 2024 09:44:14 GMT, Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk>
wrote:

>Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 09:14:59 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I'm not often left speechless but last nights C5 program about the tube
>>> managed it. LU left 200 people in 40C heat for at least 2 hours in a train
>>> stopped in a tunnel in order to try and rescue a dog that had run down the
>>> tunnel. Words genuinely failed me but I think it pretty much sums up everything
>>> thats wrong with the state apparatus in this country and the fucked up
>>> priorities of the morons that work in it.
>>>
>>> I'm waiting for the day someone sues the arse off LU/TfL when there's a serious
>>> issue with a passenger caused by something like this.
>>>
>>> As for the total cockwomble laughably called the "driver", 60K a year for
>>> that waste of space? God help us.
>>>
>> Until you catch or find it then you don't know what piece of equipment
>> or cabling it might get tangled up with or damaged along with it if it
>> gets incinerated.
>>
>
>I was surprised the dog had not received a fatal electric shock at some
>point, but then Dogs don’t perspire like we do except on their Paw pads so
>dry hair will be a good insulator ,perhaps it got an initial tingle and
>soon learnt to stay clear of that area.
>
One of the standard scenarios reported is encountering a dog
(deceased) with its jaws firmly clamped round the live rail, the usual
presumption being that it has turned on what has just put a few
hundred volts up its wagging tail.

>OTOH if a body human or animal does
>make good contact with the rail and stays there then the result can be the
>cadaver catches fire .
>A cooking carcass with the associated smell and smoke would be particularly
>unpleasant in a tube tunnel which if it penetrated a train would likely
>cause panic amongst the passengers .
>
Possibly not. The aroma is likely to be more transient than that of
some of the other passengers (e.g. the Met Line beggar on Sunday
night).

On 19/03/2024 19:45, Charles Ellson wrote:
>>> Predators usually don't eat perished prey.  Large scavengers like
>>> Vultures are rare in the UK.
>>>
>> Plenty of other scavengers, various members of the corvid family for
>> example.
>>
> Plus red kites who in past centuries used to take care of edible
> rubbish in towns.

We appear to have 2 nesting pairs of red kites around here. The local
kids get very excited when they see them while going to school.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 16:39:31 +0000
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>In message <utc8tr$smnq$1@dont-email.me>, at 14:53:47 on Tue, 19 Mar
>2024, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>>Given the foxes around here are quite happy to dine out on rotting food in
>>bins I suspect they'd have nabbed it. Perhaps urban foxes have a hardier
>>digestive system than their country cousins.
>
>Did you not get the memo that WE DON'T HAVE ANY URBAN FOXES ?

Which part of "their country cousins" confused you?

Roland, are you sure you're ok? You seem to be having basic comprehension
problems.