Give me one good reason why

[Tigger]

Then why are you doing balliff duties when you clearly do not agree with the system

would'nt be because it's for the "top" angling clubs in the country would it

 

 

ERrr...yeah it probably would

 

Don't forget the EA rod tax is a goverment rule and is not made by clubs.

 

I don't agree with a lot of things but you have to bite the bullet and conform sometimes

Edited July 7, 2010 by Tigger

[Dales]

I think the main value of the EA's work is habitat improvement - restocking is not a long term solution, it should really be considered a jump start after taking steps to deal with spawning, survival and growth in the river, or to quickly replace stocks lost to pollution.

 

This is what the EA is doing locally to me - I know they are also trying to re-establish brown trout populations in some of the tributaries.

 

I think this is good work which should be done, and I don't actually think it should be done just because anglers are paying for it - but I accept that anglers paying for it is the only way it is likely to happen. Do I think it's fair that everybody else gets their sports and hobbies subsidised by the taxpayer and we have to pay up? No. But I'd rather pay up and get something than not pay up and get nothing.

 

I think Steve's reason is the right one. I would rather this work was funded by a central government pot, but that' not going to happen.

[Worms]

I think Steve's reason is the right one. I would rather this work was funded by a central government pot, but that' not going to happen.

And, on top of that, as 'customers' the EA (should) have a responsibility to fix anything that we care to gripe about!

[smudger]

ERrr...yeah it probably would

 

Don't forget the EA rod tax is a goverment rule and is not made by clubs.

 

I don't agree with a lot of things but you have to bite the bullet and conform sometimes

ah i see, have to be one of the cliche...... how sad

Edited July 7, 2010 by smudger

[Tigger]

ah i see, have to be one of the cliche...... how sad

 

 

No, I want to be a member of the club as it's a very good club.....have you got some personal problem with that or are you just a jealous person making troll posts?

 

Edited July 7, 2010 by Tigger

[andy_youngs]

Dog licences were scrapped over 20 years ago andy

Fair point ayjay, apologies for that oversight.

 

However what nobody has addressed yet is what the EA are actually doing with our money, whether it be derived from the exchequer or the angling license.

 

I can only speak from personal experience on this.

 

In 2004 the University of Southampton was appointed by the EA to undertake an appraisal of how best to rejuvinate the River Wensum in Norfolk.

 

This review cost tens of thousands of pounds of taxpayers money. The key finding was that out a total headfall of 34m over the course of the river, 60% of this drop occurred at mill structures rather than progessively over the course of the river.

 

The key priority was therfore to remove these mill obstructions from the river so that wildlife and native river species would have an unobstructed natural corridor of movement.

 

Most of these mill structures are owned by the EA, so there is no reason why they cannot be removed ... other than the fact that to do so would upset local angling groups.

 

The problem is that about 50 years ago, these same authorities introduced barbel into the fast flowing stretches immediately downstream from the millpools, and these are the main holding points for barbel in the Wensum.

 

However, this places us in a position of direct conflict between barbel fishing verses conservation management. I don't know how it can be resolved.

 

Thankfully, it's not my problem; it's up to the EA to sort out.

 

However I suggest the EA should take note that as long as the barbel fishermen are resisting public access to the river, then I shall be resisting the barbel fishermen's demands to have the mill structure's retained.

Edited July 7, 2010 by andy_youngs

[Vagabond]

Dog licences were scrapped over 20 years ago

...and my television licence is now free. You can get a free licence for trapping crayfish too!

[andy_youngs]

You can get a free licence for trapping crayfish too!

Confession time : I've been trapping and eating the little **** for years without a license. If the powers that be want to come after me then they know where I am ....

[Christy]

Why do we have to be licensed to go fishing.

 

Water quality in rivers is a statuary requirement so we don't need to pay for that.

 

Maintenance of waterways is again, not the responsibility of anglers.

 

Maintaining good stocks of food for Grebes/herons and Otters is not the responsibilty of anglers.

 

I really cannot think of one good reason why I should be deemed a criminal and fined hundreds of pounds simply for doing a bit of fishing. Must be about the least harmful thing a man can do.

 

Den

In a perfect world I would agree with you whole heartedly Den, whoever our world, and especially, rivers/lakes are very much the opposite of perfect and in reality without the work the EA do with our license money I doubt there'd be any fish in our waters at all!

 

I do however think it's ridiculous that you have to have one to fish commercial lakes, I mean WTF is that all about?!

[arbocop]

I think the main value of the EA's work is habitat improvement - restocking is not a long term solution, it should really be considered a jump start after taking steps to deal with spawning, survival and growth in the river, or to quickly replace stocks lost to pollution.

 

This is what the EA is doing locally to me - I know they are also trying to re-establish brown trout populations in some of the tributaries.

 

http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/homea...ews/106656.aspx

 

I think this is good work which should be done, and I don't actually think it should be done just because anglers are paying for it - but I accept that anglers paying for it is the only way it is likely to happen. Do I think it's fair that everybody else gets their sports and hobbies subsidised by the taxpayer and we have to pay up? No. But I'd rather pay up and get something than not pay up and get nothing.

 

 

I agree. However, only 1.5 million of us buy one anyway so less than half think it worthwhile and consider the risk worth it.

 

The cost of doing the stuff they do, far exceeds the sum raised by rod licences.