AT helping the EA to knock the last few nails in?

[gozzer]

I've always championed the EA, saying that on balance they do a good job etc etc

 

This whole issue has showed how pointless they are. Rather than address the real problem of being completely unable to enforce anything. They've just made more rules that they still can't/won't enforce. What difference does it make? I've not seen an EA bailiff in years, who is going to stop me doing anything I want? Others don't bother respecting the rules buying licences etc etc, why should I?

 

I won't be ruled by mob idiocy I'll let my conscience decide in future.

 

Rich

 

I'm wondering if the rod license will suddenly shoot up in price, 'to pay for the extra policing that the new laws demand'.

With the government likely to announce cuts in funding for the EA, it's as good an excuse as any to raise revenue, and anglers have willingly consented to it, in some cases even demanded it.

Or am I being too cynical?

 

John.

[JV44]

I'm wondering if the rod license will suddenly shoot up in price, 'to pay for the extra policing that the new laws demand'.

With the government likely to announce cuts in funding for the EA, it's as good an excuse as any to raise revenue, and anglers have willingly consented to it, in some cases even demanded it.

Or am I being too cynical?

 

John.

 

The EA have been under pressure to become a stand alone outfit with little or no funding from the govmt and the boat licence has shot up nearly 40% over 3 years and there policing of unregistered craft is a joke at best with the sunglass wearing admirals of there patrol craft out for a jolly on the river and ignoring anything and everything,Think that there remit is to big and they don`t have the funding to do everything expected and therefore a rod licence hike is very likely but don`t expect any extra policing to go along with it ,As others have said laws in place to deal with most things and yet they still bring out more that also will not be enforced.

My prediction is rod licence to jump esp as the Ea has now bowed to public opinion and shelved plans to sell lock keepers cottages ,well untill the property prices go back up anyway Steve.

[lutra]

One angle on an outright ban of taking coarse fish I've not heard mentioned is basic human rights. Man must have been eating coarse fish since time began, does that not make it a basic human right? Are there not laws protecting these kind of rights?

Edited September 16, 2009 by lutra

[gozzer]

The EA have been under pressure to become a stand alone outfit with little or no funding from the govmt and the boat licence has shot up nearly 40% over 3 years and there policing of unregistered craft is a joke at best with the sunglass wearing admirals of there patrol craft out for a jolly on the river and ignoring anything and everything,Think that there remit is to big and they don`t have the funding to do everything expected and therefore a rod licence hike is very likely but don`t expect any extra policing to go along with it ,As others have said laws in place to deal with most things and yet they still bring out more that also will not be enforced.

My prediction is rod licence to jump esp as the Ea has now bowed to public opinion and shelved plans to sell lock keepers cottages ,well untill the property prices go back up anyway Steve.

 

I don't really expect an increase in the number of bailiffs Steve, but as I said it's a good excuse to raise the license fee by a significant amount.

 

John.

[Dick Dastardly]

I've always championed the EA, saying that on balance they do a good job etc etc

 

This whole issue has showed how pointless they are. Rather than address the real problem of being completely unable to enforce anything. They've just made more rules that they still can't/won't enforce. What difference does it make? I've not seen an EA bailiff in years, who is going to stop me doing anything I want? Others don't bother respecting the rules buying licences etc etc, why should I?

 

I won't be ruled by mob idiocy I'll let my conscience decide in future.

 

Rich

 

This whole lark is a classic British ****** where a body actually ends up dissafecting the people who would be its main supporters! in an atempt to convert/bring in line those who would never be.

[Worms]

One angle on an outright ban of taking coarse fish I've not heard mentioned is basic human rights. Man must have been eating coarse fish since time began, does that not make it a basic human right? Are there not laws protecting these kind of rights?

I doubt it, from what I've seen, the only people allowed Human rights these days are criminals

[Anderoo]

I doubt it, from what I've seen, the only people allowed Human rights these days are criminals

 

 

*coughdailymailcough*

 

I was out for a meal yesterday evening and, to my disappointment, it was mentioned that I go fishing. The first question asked, with genuine interest, was - oh, do you take them home to eat? My girlfriend replied, no, he puts them back. Oh, said the first woman - you'd have to do a lot to convince me that's not really cruel. Me too, said the other person at the table. And me, joined in my girlfriend. The mood darkened...

 

That's the general public.

 

If I'd said, yes I do sometimes, if it's the right species and the right size, what do you suppose their reactions would have been?

 

What about if I'd said, no I let them go again so I can catch them again, but in order for that to happen I have to kill all the bloody otters in the river?

 

The other thing she said was, well at least tell me you don't use one of those annoying beeping things? Hmmm, yes, I do sometimes, I said, in the right circumstances. She went on to describe a few walks she's had in the country ruined by incessant bite alarms beeping along rivers and around lakes.

 

For those with their heads firmly in the sand, if you really want to know what most people think of catch and release angling, just ask them and they will tell you.

 

Any half competent government (no obvious jokes please ) or mainstream media outlet can channel that to their own ends, if they were so inclined, with a snap of their fingers. Who's there on our side to retort? AT?

[Steve Walker]

Very well said, Anderoo - most anglers don't seem to grasp the implications of that. Most people have fish killed for them to eat, so fishing for food is OK by them. That's about as far as most people go with their moral philosophy - just like the willingness of anglers to ban methods they don't personally use.

 

To my knowledge, the only countries ever to ban angling banned only catch and release. I would not be surprised to see that spreading throughout Europe and eventually coming here.

 

I'm glad I do a bit of sea and game fishing, though there are strong movements against ever taking anything for the table in those camps too. It's a mistake, I feel, even if (like me) you seldom exercise the option to take a fish.

[Steve Coppolo]

*coughdailymailcough*

 

I was out for a meal yesterday evening and, to my disappointment, it was mentioned that I go fishing. The first question asked, with genuine interest, was - oh, do you take them home to eat? My girlfriend replied, no, he puts them back. Oh, said the first woman - you'd have to do a lot to convince me that's not really cruel. Me too, said the other person at the table. And me, joined in my girlfriend. The mood darkened...

 

That's the general public.

 

If I'd said, yes I do sometimes, if it's the right species and the right size, what do you suppose their reactions would have been?

 

What about if I'd said, no I let them go again so I can catch them again, but in order for that to happen I have to kill all the bloody otters in the river?

 

The other thing she said was, well at least tell me you don't use one of those annoying beeping things? Hmmm, yes, I do sometimes, I said, in the right circumstances. She went on to describe a few walks she's had in the country ruined by incessant bite alarms beeping along rivers and around lakes.

 

For those with their heads firmly in the sand, if you really want to know what most people think of catch and release angling, just ask them and they will tell you.

 

Any half competent government (no obvious jokes please ) or mainstream media outlet can channel that to their own ends, if they were so inclined, with a snap of their fingers. Who's there on our side to retort? AT?

 

I agree with what you say. Here's a short exctract from an article I wrote for Boat Fishing Monthly magazine back in July 2008.

 

"You might think that this obsession with returning every fish you catch must be driven by the anti angling lobby or an animal welfare group, but you would be wrong. A few years ago, whilst fishing my local river for Pike, I happened to hook one just as a dog walker was passing my swim. She stopped and watched me land it, congratulated me, then stood admiring the fish while I unhooked it. However, the smiles and pleasantries were soon replaced with looks of contempt and verbal abuse when I went to return the Pike to the water. She couldn’t believe I didn’t want to eat it and that I had dragged that poor fish out of the water just for fun! (If she’d seen the Gudgeon live bait that had blown up my trace she would have lynched me, I’m sure!) When we are fishing out at sea, we are not subject to scrutiny from passers by. It is, therefore, difficult for us to comprehend how the non angling public think of us and what we do. To a large percentage of them, angling is for producing food. Sticking hooks into fish and dragging them out of their environment just for fun is cruel. Sports fishing, or fishing for fun, is something invented, supported and promoted, by anglers. And long may it continue. Fishing is fun and I don’t have to eat everything I catch to enjoy it, regardless of what Joe Public thinks. Where it all starts going wrong, though, is when anglers themselves promote catch and release as a conservation measure and put pressure on the powers that be to introduce unnecessary restrictions on anglers take."

[Anderoo]

Exactly Steve. Take away the right to take fish and we take away the right to fish at all. I can't understand why people don't realise this. Unless there are loads of intelligent, qualified, articulate, media-savvy anglers I don't know about ready and waiting to defend our pastime under the glare of studio lights?

 

Anyone?