Jump to content

Proposed legislation.


gozzer

Recommended Posts

maybe regarding the rivers their ( the EA's) stock fish (stock for putting elswhere) are getting their lips holey :( the EA are quick to point out no-one owns river fish but seem to own all of them when a few thousand fish are needed :rolleyes:

 

do the EA sell fish?

Edited by chesters1

Believe NOTHING anyones says or writes unless you witness it yourself and even then your eyes can deceive you

None of this "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" crap it just means i have at least two enemies!

 

There is only one opinion i listen to ,its mine and its ALWAYS right even when its wrong

 

Its far easier to curse the darkness than light one candle

 

Mathew 4:19

Grangers law : anything i say will  turn out the opposite or not happen at all!

Life insurance? you wont enjoy a penny!

"To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical." Thomas Jefferson

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 74
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

This is just a knee jerk catch all responce to the EA's total inability to enforce current rules and an attempt to convince people that they are doing something about the assault on fish stocks from immigrant communities.

 

I think you're probably right Ken, but it angers me when they go on about taking a few fish out will spoil the balance of the water. They don't mention that putting new species in, will have an even bigger impact.

 

John.

Angling is more than just catching fish, if it wasn't it would just be called 'catching'......... John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whole different subject but I completely agree. Invasive aliens like carp are the real threat to our waterways.

Species caught in 2020: Barbel. European Eel. Bleak. Perch. Pike.

Species caught in 2019: Pike. Bream. Tench. Chub. Common Carp. European Eel. Barbel. Bleak. Dace.

Species caught in 2018: Perch. Bream. Rainbow Trout. Brown Trout. Chub. Roach. Carp. European Eel.

Species caught in 2017: Siamese carp. Striped catfish. Rohu. Mekong catfish. Amazon red tail catfish. Arapaima. Black Minnow Shark. Perch. Chub. Brown Trout. Pike. Bream. Roach. Rudd. Bleak. Common Carp.

Species caught in 2016: Siamese carp. Jullien's golden carp. Striped catfish. Mekong catfish. Amazon red tail catfish. Arapaima. Alligator gar. Rohu. Black Minnow Shark. Roach, Bream, Perch, Ballan Wrasse. Rudd. Common Carp. Pike. Zander. Chub. Bleak.

Species caught in 2015: Brown Trout. Roach. Bream. Terrapin. Eel. Barbel. Pike. Chub.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, my fault, I blame the weather.

I wasn't refering to the eels or shad, it was the proposed legislation on removal of any coarse fish that bothers me.

 

The link I should have given was this one.

 

We've discussed this many times on AN, with a majority not supporting a complete ban, but it looks like it might be brought in 'through the back door'.

 

John.

Isn't it already illegal to take fish from the vast majority of still waters without the owners permission?

 

Do we really have a problem with river fish being taken to the extent we need to change the law and risk opening the door for more criticism from anti anglers?

 

Does the taking of a few none specimen sized fish make any difference other than maybe up the average size if done to the extreme?

 

Which species are they trying to protect? River carp from the polls? (they can eat all they like for me).

 

A tiger does not lose sleep over the opinion of sheep

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just came across this consultation in the course of my work (non-angling related). I thought I'd have a quick read through as interested in the eel issue, when I came across the actual proposals tucked away at the end and quite frankly I am absolutely appalled.

 

A debate on sustainability of fish in public fisheries and on current rules/enforcement of rule is desirable and welcome.

 

However, hiding away a wide ranging and important policy under the cover of an inoffensive (some might say obscure) consultation on specific fisheries policies is quite despicable and indicative of the attitude of officals at such quangos - and from what I've seen of them the EA in particular.

 

The press release insinuates that this is some kind of emergency positive conservation policy to be introduced for two specific species, which I expect less than 1% of anglers would object to. The reality is the EA wants to grab legal jurisdiction under-the-radar to be able to dictate policy on taking any fish from public waterways. I don't even eat coarse fish but I am quite lost for words at the arrogance, dishonesty, and anti-democratic taste left in my mouth here.

 

There seems to be EA officials who hang around here. Could you please explain eaxctly what is going on here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Same here Jim, I only found it because of Eltons link, and I had a root about in the other links on there.

I does seem to have been hidden away for some reason, perhaps an ulterior motive is behind it.

Many on here think that if we give up the right to take the odd 'one for the pot', (whether we actually do it or not), it will be the thin end of the wedge, leading to other legislation.

The fact that it seems to have been done in an underhand way, doesn't help the situation.

 

John.

Angling is more than just catching fish, if it wasn't it would just be called 'catching'......... John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Same here Jim, I only found it because of Eltons link, and I had a root about in the other links on there.

I does seem to have been hidden away for some reason, perhaps an ulterior motive is behind it.

Many on here think that if we give up the right to take the odd 'one for the pot', (whether we actually do it or not), it will be the thin end of the wedge, leading to other legislation.

The fact that it seems to have been done in an underhand way, doesn't help the situation.

 

John.

 

I agree. I've read it, and don't like it much, it doesn't leave us much room to manoeuvre in the future does it? The points about shad and eels are fine, and indeed welcome, but lumping all the species together is not clever. It's clearly an attempt to appease the 'our eastern European friends are eating all our fish' lot.

 

If the problem is with people taking too many adult, breeding fish, why not re-introduce the old size limits?

 

The one size fits all approach is certainly easier to set up, but it won't be enforced anyway, so there's little actual point.

And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I take the odd fish for the pot. Other than trout and sea trout, I take the odd grayling (two last year), perch and jack pike. All pefectly delicious fish. To lump all coarse fish (including grayling) into a no-take basket would pi55 me off in the extreme.

 

The legislation is obviously aimed at our foreign cousins with slightly different fish tastes to ours so, this is a perfectly good opportunity to upgrade the water bailiff system, get some bodies on the beat and make a bloody difference.

 

As well as preventing poaching/fish theft, water quality/bank erosion/fly-tipping issues would be observed by the officials and something would be more likely to happen as a result.

 

10 million quid on river improvements was mentioned in another thread. Spend the 10 million employing hundreds more water bailiffs and water quality will very rapidly improve!

 

Yours, Mr. Fuming-Gently, Herefordshire.

Eating wild caught fish is good for my health, reduces food miles and keeps me fit trying to catch them........it's my choice to do it, not yours to stop me!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It says 'consultation' which in my experience means a cosmetic process to dress up as democratic, a decision already taken. Cynical? Moi?

 

If this is enacted, it will be as short-sighted and draconian as the Dangerous Dogs and Firearms Acts. Both the result of press inspired populism rather than the application of any level of commonsense. The one thing I do admire in the piece is its clarity.

 

Perhaps it's this clarity which makes it so dangerous.

This is a signature, there are many signatures like it but this one is mine

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We and our partners use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences, repeat visits and to show you personalised advertisements. By clicking “I Agree”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies. However, you may visit Cookie Settings to provide a controlled consent.