We came across this swan today, while walking the dogs down by the river. I was thankful that the nest was built down at the side of a bridge, and I was able to get close and still keep railings in between us, because I have a healthy respect for swans sitting on nests, especially when I have dogs with me. I read once in a local newspaper about a man who was walking two retrievers who got too close to a nest and the swans actually made a serious attempt to drown them. They were only saved because the man was able to distract the birds long enough for his dogs to swim to shore. But that’s perfectly natural behaviour when the swans are defending their young.

No, the weird thing is this. If you look closely at the picture, you’ll see that the swans have incorporated a ton of junk into their platform. Old plastic bags, crushed two-litre drink bottles, all kinds of stuff, though mostly plastic.

I’d like to tell them that as a decorative effort it doesn’t work too well, but I guess the swans might think differently, and I’m wondering if they’re smarter than I give them credit for. I mean, what if all that plastic is supposed to act as a buoyancy aid, should the river flood? Of course, it would have been better to choose bottles with the tops still firmly screwed on, but still … not bad for a bird brain. Or perhaps it’s camouflage? The swan is white, some of the plastic is white, or white-ish … ?

Has anyone else seen anything like this? Is it common for swans to collect rubbish for their nests? And why do they do it? Such beautiful birds to surround themselves with ugly stuff!

We were doing a little tidying up. As usual, I was trying to do several things at once (we women are known to be big on multi-tasking, you know) while OH was, as usual, concentrating meticulously on one task at a time. He’s actually pretty good at housework - even if he does sometimes need reminding how the tumble-drier works.

Anyway. I came into the kitchen at one point and found this.

Now, I know he loves his tea - he really does love his tea - but had it really been that long since he had one?

No. 1 son came round the other night to borrow the sat nav. He told us he was thinking about getting a motorbike again and the conversation turned to protective clothing. He still had his helmet and boots, and a decent pair of bike gloves, but he didn’t have a jacket. Now, I hold a motorbike licence, but it’s been a few years since I rode one, because what with the fibromyalgia and thyroid problem I walk around half asleep most days and that’s kind of dangerous on a bike. So I said he could try my jacket to see if it fitted him, them being unisex and all, and it did. In fact - wouldn’t you know it - it looks better on him than it ever did on me. It’s a black and yellow textile Akito Jacket with lightweight body armour and it made me look like a benevolent wasp. He, on the other hand, looks rather dashing.

‘Wow, it fits!’ he said. ‘Are you sure I can have it?’

Me: Of course, if you promise me not to kill yourself in it.

No. 1 Son: Oh, you want me to die naked?

Me: No … I …

No. 1 Son (interrupting): I suppose being naked on a bike would help with the dying part. Only I have a feeling it’s illegal - after all, I wouldn’t be wearing a helmet.

Smartypants.

If he does kill himself, naked or not, I’ll be really pissed. But he’d be better off wearing the jacket. That way, if he merely topples off gently going round a corner, he might not break his collar bone like his father did.

After issuing my challenge to other bloggers to find something quirky and unusual in their neighbourhood, Natural, of Thinking Out Loud, posted this rather delightful mixed bag as a response. Buried in there is a link to a video documentary which appears to have been made by the youth of Maplewood, New Jersey, with the help of various locals. Watch it before reading the rest of this. It’s enlightening, the young people put their point across well, and the movie is very watchable.

It got me thinking. Maplewood is not unusual in this one failing, nor is it exclusively an American problem. I think many of our own towns and cities fail the younger generations in this way. You might almost expect it in villages with a small population, because they simply don’t have the resources to provide much - and yet they often manage very well. My own village is well served, since it hosts a local secondary school with an intake which covers several rural communities and this school provides evening classes, sports facilities and a youth club. We also have a busy village hall which offers various activities including Shotokan karate.

In other areas, where there is less to do, public benches have been removed to prevent local teens ‘hanging around’ and ‘making noise’. Okay, no-one wants groups of rowdy kids outside their door, but for crying out loud, do we as a society really not understand that if you give kids nothing to do and nowhere to go, they are going to be a damn nuisance? It’s like confining an adolescent border collie to a house and tiny garden with insufficient exercise and no mental stimulation. Is it, or is it not, going to turn into an uncontrollable hooligan? Of course it is. It is simple cause and effect. Hopefully, no sane person would expect otherwise.

So why do we expect our teens to get to the point where they’ve outgrown the kid stuff like playing round each other’s houses and biking around the park and playing on the swings and being taken to ballet classes and Cub Scouts, and miraculously turn themselves into steady, responsible young adults when we give them absolutely nothing to do and nowhere to go? They are still young and physical, and they don’t want to hang at home with the old fogeys, they need to get out and be doing.

We take away the biking and the swings and we give them a bunch of ‘don’ts’ - don’t bike or skateboard or roller blade on the pavements. Don’t climb on stuff. Don’t rough-house with your mates, and please! Don’t even think about freerunning, you might hurt yourself or break something or get in the way. And then we give them no alternatives at all and expect them to keep out of trouble.

Is it any wonder that they feel alienated? Is it any wonder that they sit in front of the computer chatting on IM, and MySpace, and Facebook, and playing games all day and half the night? Is it any wonder that they climb buildings and hang off bridges and spray graffiti, or that they get frustrated and break things, just because they can?

What is so hard about providing one single ‘you can hang out here’ venue in each community? Sure, these days you’ll have to police it, but actually, young people have always benefited from a supervising adult. And the cost - while high - is surely less than the policing and fixing and repainting you’ll be doing if you don’t amuse them, and much less than providing secure accommodation for repeat offenders.

I’m not completely naive (having raised two boys myself) and I don’t imagine that this is the easy fix to all social ills, but just think about it. If you take any young dog or horse or monkey and confine it and frustrate it, I guarantee there will be huge great wads of trouble, with a sizeable potential for harm, both to others and to themselves. Young people are not so very different.

What’s wrong with an area set aside for teens, with very much larger equipment for them to play on, or sit and hang out on? Now, I realise that in this litigation-minded society this ain’t gonna go down too well with the Powers That Be, but it’s maybe what they need. Young people need somewhere to exercise both mind and body, and they need to dare. To risk. To see how far they can push themselves.

And until we adults remember how we were as teens and do something constructive about that - are we not always going to have trouble?