Proposed legislation.

[Steve Walker]

I can get annoyed as much as the next man/woman about the EA , but let's be honest - how better could it be done? The cost implications of administering an e-mail/mail shot have already been highlighted by others in this thread.

 

Hmm. I've just emailed a newsletter to 4000 of our customers, and it cost nothing. There's no reason they couldn't have emailed all of the people who bought their licence online, they have the email addresses.

[gozzer]

I've just 'trawled' through the 90 odd replies on the EA site.

https://consult.environment-agency.gov.uk/p...sh/fish_removal

 

I struggled to believe some of the comments on there. There are plenty of "immigrant" references, and plenty of conflicting comments within the same replies!

 

A large majority are in favour of the proposed legislation, (although some of the reasoning is questionable), many citing the hysterical 'facts' reported by the 'weeklies'.

 

With the underhand way the EA have introduced these proposals, it seems that they believe that the outcome is 'cut and dried'.

 

It will (I believe) lead to a live baiting ban in England next, and from then on anything can happen.

 

John.

[Anderoo]

Completed, with both barrels. I had to wait until I was in a bad enough mood to fill it in

 

What a badly constructed questionaire. If I hadn't explained myself with extra comments for each question, it would be completely meaningless. I expect they'll just output the results as a graph and largely ingore the comments anyway, unless they agree with what they're aiming to do.

 

EDIT: I just made the mistake of reading some of the comments...

Edited August 3, 2009 by Anderoo

[gozzer]

You've just got to wait for it to be approved now Andrew, mine took a week or so.

 

I'm surprised that so few have bothered to send a comment......no scrub that.....it's about what I expected!

 

 

 

John.

 

EDIT.

 

Just seen your edit. It makes interesting reading. A real insight into the minds of the average angler, perhaps?

 

It's like the otter thread we were on about (that's now locked), it turned a bit nasty towards the end.

Edited August 3, 2009 by gozzer

[Anderoo]

Can't we gather them all together and hit them around the head with a 'bigger picture' bat?

[gozzer]

Can't we gather them all together and hit them around the head with a 'bigger picture' bat?

 

 

 

I don't think you could get a bat big enough or hard enough.

It's a bad case of narrow minds combined with tunnel vision, fuelled with hysterical reports.

 

 

John.

[Steve Walker]

Just read the responses myself - seems most respondents want a ban on killing any coarse fish, unless they fish for pike, in which case they want a ban on anyone else killing any coarse fish. Hypocrites. Also, some bizarre ideas about fish population dynamics, and some spectacularly bad logic.

[Anderoo]

Spectacularly bad logic

 

It's a real shame that the weeklies have this much influence on people. You can see the same regurgitated nonsense time and again.

[Dick Dastardly]

One reason why anglers shouldnt be involved in any fishery management decisions is that they no bugger all about it and base their opinions on both their own selfish agendas and "bankside myth" often perpetuated by the angling press in its constant effort to sell copies!

 

Proper qualified and experienced proffesionals should make the decisions over fish stocks and the likes with a view to whats ecologically best not whats "best" for the instant bag up angler.

 

Armchair experts can make as many daft rules about how we fish as they want.We can then choose to obey them or not! but if they are allowed to run riot with the important decisions regarding the likes of stocking,seasons,taking fish,yes/no otters etc etc then yhey could screw it all up and then the rest of us have no choice.

[captain cojones]

It's a real shame that the weeklies have this much influence on people. You can see the same regurgitated nonsense time and again.

 

its not just the angling papers,its the comics generally.