Angling Trust Forum

[Bob Bradford]

Run along, Bob. You are well out of your depth.

 

Spin doesn't cut it around here.

 

Not spin pal, just pointing out a fact.

 

Some are so concerned about their angling, but they actually do nothing of any significance , they take but put nothing back, they wish to be heard, but will not pay to be heard, they want an organisation but will not join one, they talk of "rights" but will not fight for their "rights", ...................I think White Noise sums them up accurately enough.

 

Regards Bob.

[Worms]

http://www.whitenoisemachine.co.uk/

To ignore critical appraisal and to suggest methods of covering it up, ignoring it or destroying it is something that has no place in a right-minded populace. Members and supporters of extremist political groups have been guilty of it for a long time. These people are usually condemned by the majority of citizens as extremists, terrorists, fascists, fundamentalists and worse.

 

I'm sure your post on the white noise machine was not trying to implicate that members of the AT or any other angling group are such and I am sure they are not. I think it is just another example of your "sense of humour".

 

Most people are trying to be constructive here because we want angling to survive. Your views are welcome but, please Bob, try and see other people's points of view and reply to them with a semblance of decorum and professionalism that one would expect from angling's "governing body".

Edited January 10, 2010 by Worms

[Sharkbyte]

Not spin pal, just pointing out a fact.

 

Some are so concerned about their angling, but they actually do nothing of any significance , they take but put nothing back, they wish to be heard, but will not pay to be heard, they want an organisation but will not join one, they talk of "rights" but will not fight for their "rights", ...................I think White Noise sums them up accurately enough.

 

Regards Bob.

 

 

Carry on like that and I'll make you look even more of a fool than you do already.

 

 

Second thoughts, what's the point. I'll spend an hour knocking out a very long and detailed post, for a one liner in return.

[Bob Bradford]

To ignore critical appraisal and to suggest methods of covering it up, ignoring it or destroying it is something that has no place in a right-minded populace. Members and supporters of extremist political groups have been guilty of it for a long time. These people are usually condemned by the majority of citizens as extremists, terrorists, fascists, fundamentalists and worse.

 

I'm sure your post on the white noise machine was not trying to implicate that members of the AT or any other angling group are such and I am sure they are not. I think it is just another example of your "sense of humour".

 

Most people are trying to be constructive here because we want angling to survive. Your views are welcome but, please Bob, try and see other people's points of view and reply to them with a semblance of decorum and professionalism that one would expect from angling's "governing body".

 

Yes, it was my attempt at a little levity, this thread has become very depressing and going round and round in circles, I will try to appeal to the common sense and reasoning of some one last time, although I will not hold my breath though, here goes;

 

I am suggesting the White noise is emanating from this forum, or at least from a few of it's members, they drone on and on relentlessly, in the end people stop listening, this thread is dripping with negativity, I have read through all of it and it is the same few protagonists, they spend hours on here, would they not be better employed doing something more constructive and meaningful?

 

Lets take a look at the Eel issue, I live in the East of England and there was a time when all the major rivers, Welland,Witham,Trent ,Nene, Yare, Waveney, Bure etc, were over run with them, some of the matches I used to fish, one had to target the Eel as a match winning option, such was their abundance!

 

Now go to any of those rivers and TRY and catch one ,single solitary Eel, it is nigh on impossible, such is the extent of it's demise........so as a conservationist and realist, ask yourself what exactly it is the new proposed legislation is asking you to "give up?"

 

To continue catching it's ever decreasing numbers and taking them for the pot is nothing short of vandalism, to demand the right to do so is nothing short of criminal.

 

I realise that some of you see the Eel issue as a point of principle that you must make a stand on, an eroding of your "free will?", I also realise that some of you are responsible enough to catch and release all the Eels you catch because you are aware of their plight, but not every angler will show the same logic or compassion........hence the new proposals, we, anglers, have to take responsibility because no-one else will.

 

These fish need protecting NOW! and the new proposed by-law are one small step toward that aim, we have to compromise to ask others to compromise, indeed , we have to demand the commercial Eel netters give up their livelihood, some like Steve are demanding just that, so a man must give up his only form of income to appease you, but you will not give up the right to take "one for the pot Steve?" can you not see how unjust and selfish that is?

 

Stop being so bloody minded and petty, anglers can lead the way on this , and show the world we are prepared to make sacrifices for the good of the common Eel, I will be fighting as hard as anyone to stop the commercial netting of Eels, lets do this together ,standing shoulder to shoulder like responsible anglers for the overall good of angling eh?

Edited January 11, 2010 by Bob Bradford

[Worms]

Yes, it was my attempt at a little levity, this thread has become very depressing and going round and round in circles, I will try to appeal to the common sense and reasoning of some one last time, although I will not hold my breath though, here goes;

 

I am suggesting the White noise is emanating from this forum, or at least from a few of it's members, they drone on and on relentlessly, in the end people stop listening, this thread is dripping with negativity, I have read through all of it and it is the same few protagonists, they spend hours on here, would they not be better employed doing something more constructive and meaningful?

 

Lets take a look at the Eel issue, I live in the East of England and there was a time when all the major rivers, Welland,Witham,Trent ,Nene, Yare, Waveney, Bure etc, were over run with them, some of the matches I used to fish, one had to target the Eel as a match winning option, such was their abundance!

 

Now go to any of those rivers and TRY and catch one ,single solitary Eel, it is nigh on impossible, such is the extent of it's demise........so as a conservationist and realist, ask yourself what exactly it is the new proposed legislation is asking you to "give up?"

 

To continue catching it's ever decreasing numbers and taking them for the pot is nothing short of vandalism, to demand the right to do so is nothing short of criminal.

 

I realise that some of you see the Eel issue as a point of principle that you must make a stand on, an eroding of your "free will?", I also realise that some of you are responsible enough to catch and release all the Eels you catch because you are aware of their plight, but not every angler will show the same logic or compassion........hence the new proposals, we, anglers, have to take responsibility because no-one else will.

 

These fish need protecting NOW! and the new proposed by-law are one small step toward that aim, we have to compromise to ask others to compromise, indeed , we have to demand the commercial Eel netters give up their livelihood, some like Steve are demanding just that, so a man must give up his only form of income to appease you, but you will not give up the right to take "one for the pot Steve?" can you not see how unjust and selfish that is?

 

Stop being so bloody minded and petty, anglers can lead the way on this , and show the world we are prepared to make sacrifices for the good of the common Eel, I will be fighting as hard as anyone to stop the commercial netting of Eels, lets do this together ,standing shoulder to shoulder like responsible anglers for the overall good of angling eh?

Fair enough, let's for the moment accept that anglers could be doing good for eels by not targeting them at all and, should they catch one then it is returned with minimum delay. This will comply with the proposed new anti-angling legislation.

 

Where a lot of people have concerns, yourself included, is the commercial side of things. As the figures clearly show eel and elver catches have dropped dramatically. to the point that I should imagine there are few if any commercial eel catchers who rely entirely on eels as a way of life.

 

The point that has been raised and I agree with is why an angling body is actively supporting legislation that acknowledges the parlous state of the "critically endangered eel" but is not standing up and saying no, this is not good enough. These creatures should be protected from commercial exploitation and specifically export!

 

That would show non-anglers that the angling community has strong views on conservation and is prepared to stand up and make a noise about it.

 

At the moment the AT might as well be another government sideshow as they seem to just agree with badly thought out legislation.

Edited January 11, 2010 by Worms

[Bob Bradford]

Fair enough, let's for the moment accept that anglers could be doing good for eels by not targeting them at all and, should they catch one then it is returned with minimum delay. This will comply with the proposed new anti-angling legislation.

 

Where a lot of people have concerns, yourself included, is the commercial side of things. As the figures clearly show eel and elver catches have dropped dramatically. to the point that I should imagine there are few if any commercial eel catchers who rely entirely on eels as a way of life.

 

The point that has been raised and I agree with is why an angling body is actively supporting legislation that acknowledges the parlous state of the "critically endangered eel" but is not standing up and saying no, this is not good enough. These creatures should be protected from commercial exploitation and specifically export!

 

That would show non-anglers that the angling community has strong views on conservation and is prepared to stand up and make a noise about it.

 

At the moment the AT might as well be another government sideshow as they seem to just agree with badly thought out legislation.

 

 

I agree, I agree I agree! really most of us are not that far apart with our thoughts, which is precisely why, as a concerned member of the Angling Trust I asked Mark Lloyd recently, and on the Angling Trust forum, to expand on his/AT's thoughts regarding the issue of commercial netting, I am still waiting for a reply, perhaps he has not spotted it, so I will ask the question of him, and again ,and again and again, until he answers, fair enough Worms?

[gozzer]

To continue catching it's ever decreasing numbers and taking them for the pot is nothing short of vandalism, to demand the right to do so is nothing short of criminal.

 

I realise that some of you see the Eel issue as a point of principle that you must make a stand on, an eroding of your "free will?", I also realise that some of you are responsible enough to catch and release all the Eels you catch because you are aware of their plight, but not every angler will show the same logic or compassion........hence the new proposals, we, anglers, have to take responsibility because no-one else will.

These fish need protecting NOW! and the new proposed by-law are one small step toward that aim, we have to compromise to ask others to compromise, indeed , we have to demand the commercial Eel netters give up their livelihood, some like Steve are demanding just that, so a man must give up his only form of income to appease you, but you will not give up the right to take "one for the pot Steve?" can you not see how unjust and selfish that is?

 

I can understand what you are trying to say Bob, I only wish that you could understand what others say. For instance, the part of your post I have highlighted, "anglers have to take responsibility", but angler are not responsible for the demise of eels, so why should they be the only ones that have to take responsibility?

Under the new legislation (as Steve pointed out), if anyone deep hooks an eel and it's obviously a 'goner', then legally they have to put it back, to take it for the pot or for bait is acting illegally.

 

As for conservation, the EA have said that the present level of taking coarse fish, does not adversely effect stock levels, so why the need for the legislation that they say they can't police? They say it can effect the balance of fish species in a water, but don't bother about the imbalance that introducing a different species can cause.

It's totally useless and unnecessary piece of legislation that will do nothing to protect the fish stock of our waters. I fear it will lead to more unnecessary legislation that will have an even bigger impact on angling.

 

 

 

John.

[Leon Roskilly]

I agree, I agree I agree! really most of us are not that far apart with our thoughts, which is precisely why, as a concerned member of the Angling Trust I asked Mark Lloyd recently, and on the Angling Trust forum, to expand on his/AT's thoughts regarding the issue of commercial netting, I am still waiting for a reply, perhaps he has not spotted it, so I will ask the question of him, and again ,and again and again, until he answers, fair enough Worms?

 

 

The Specialist Anglers Alliance, of which Mike Heylin was secretary and now part of the Angling Trust, has been working with both the eel specialist angling groups and the European Anglers Alliance on conservation measures for eels, including restrictions on commercial fishing and the trade in both elvers and eels, as well as programmes to clear obstructions on rivers etc, in both the UK and in Europe, for quite a few years now that I'm aware of, and as far as I am aware will continue to do so.

 

 

http://www.anglersnet.co.uk/forums/Eels-ga...aded#entry37475

Edited January 11, 2010 by Leon Roskilly

[Bob Bradford]

The Specialist Anglers Alliance, of which Mike Heylin was secretary and now part of the Angling Trust, has been working with both the eel specialist angling groups and the European Anglers Alliance on conservation measures for eels, including restrictions on commercial fishing and the trade in both elvers and eels, as well as programmes to clear obstructions on rivers etc, in both the UK and in Europe, for quite a few years now that I'm aware of, and as far as I am aware will continue to do so.

 

Leon, is there any evidence these measures are working? if they are, then why the proposed by-laws on rod and line caught Eels?

 

Gozzer (John) pertinent questions that need answering ............but not by me, by Mark Lloyd or Mike Heylin I would have thought, would you like me to ask these questions on the Angling Trust forum on your behalf?

[Steve Walker]

Given that the largest market for farmed eels (farmed from wild caught elvers) is the country that refuses to stop eating whales, I am sceptical of the idea that commercial over-exploitation of eels will stop so long as it is legal to exploit them somewhere within their range.