Abolishing the EA licence

[teepee]

well said scott but a "twerp is a twerp" the twerp with a rod.. the twerp with a boat.. the twerp with a bike.. the twerp with a pair of jogging shoes who thinks he's colin jackson and has got to try and hurdle every pole on the towpath, its the twerps that spoil it we can all get on together with a bit of give and take, oh and the twerps with dogs who use the towpath as dog toilets, TWERPS WHO NEEDS THEM.

[Peter Sharpe]

It sounds as if someone in the Angler's Mail offices was sitting at his desk, rubbing his chin, thinking,

"Mmm, close season again. What can we do to fill a couple of pages and encourage sacks full of letters? We can't drag up that old "Close season: Yes or No?" chestnut all over again. Got it! Let's abolish the licence fee and get the government to pay it. Idiotic I know, but our readership are a rabble who are easily roused. Go for it!"

In the next few weeks:

Should there be a progressive length tax on poles?

Council tax to be charged on long-stay bivvies.

Fox hunts to target zander.

French carp immigrant found living in her own council house with 500,000 children.

[davidP]

A boater pays more than an angler on an individual basis, but most fishig rights are let out to clubs on a per-mile cost which is substantially more then boaters pay. A club with a 100 peg stretch may have a couple of hundred members and sell day tickets in order to reduce the cost to individuals. It doesn't remove the fact that those 100 pegs may cost the club £1000 per year.

 

The other main bone of centention on canals is bikers. What the vast majority of bikers don't realise is that they are supposed to buy a permit from British Waterways to ride on the towpath (as most of them are private property belonging to BW I believe). As most bikers don't belong to any kind of biking organisation or read any of the biking press they really have no way of knowing they're supposed to have a permit. Have you ever seen a sign about it on a towpath? I know I haven't. But who can blame them for wanting to ride towpaths? They're flat and safe, clearly marked on the map and offer easy cycling in a nice environment with no cars!

 

Many anglers however do themselves no favours. They adopt the attitude that because they've paid a couple of quid to be there they are entitled to block the towpath with equipment and turn it into an obstacle course, block the canal until the last second with long poles and generally behave in a grumpy unpleasant manner to the other canal users. If you behave like this to people then they do it back to you! And you'd think that after all this time they'd realise that if you fish a canal then boats, people and bikes happen!

[phonebush]

Hey Peter,

We had pole taxes til the late 1800's!

Phone

[OP-JB]

ALAN FAWCETT:

Pg 6 of todays AM in the left hand coloum very top article.

 

It seems three chaps from coventry have seen fit to get a petition together to abolish the EA rod licence claiming the goverment should fund it.

 

>Of course the rod licence should be banned.

>Anglers should support which ever organisation >they wish ie; Wild Trout Trust, A.C.A.or a >voluntary contribution to the E.A. The E.A. >claim credit for everything positive that >happens in it`s area regardless of whether it is >responsible or not and they need to and have >less of a monopoly.  There needs to be other >groups with power to take on the E.A. over >things like the National Trout and Grayling >Fishery Stategy which is being slipped through >now in the most disgracful fashion. The E.A. is >a Goverment Agency

>and should be funded by goverment.

 

They have already got support from two NON angling MP's.

 

Now my question is

 

Would you sign this petition??

 

>Petitions will get you no where

.

.

.

.

.

.

Now before you decided think carefully about it.

1) while we are paying the goverment will have to think about the amount of money at stake if they abolish angling.

 

>Why are you so paranoid? Nobody is going to >abolish angling, but I certainly wouldn`t trust >the E.A. for support if it was proposed.

 

2) If we aren't paying then the anti's will find so much easier to get rid of the "sponging/freeloading" anglers.

 

>The anglers wont be sponging off anyone. Think >of the amount of money we spend on our tackle. >The responsible anglers will support worthy >organisations who lobby, procecute and develop. >With the proper funding going to to correct >organisations we will very quickly get some long >standing problems sorted out. The E.A. is funded >mainly by anglers and yet only 14per cent of >it`s resoures are directed back at anglers. >Instead the money goes to projects like the >reinstation of Salmon into rivers so the public >see the great job they are doing by cleaning up >rivers. Great indicators these Salmon, catch >only one coming back and its salary increases >all round. How stupid do they think we are?

 

3) Why are two non angling MP's interested in helping angling?? (hidden agenda maybe?)

 

>Who cares? We are a group of over 1000,000.

 

4) while we pay we have a say (well to some extent)

 

>Dont we have a say as British Citizens?

 

5) While the rod licence exists they will need bailiffs to do checks , so no rod licence no bailiffs & unemployment will go up.

 

>By one in my area but i`m sure they will find >him a job.

 

.

.

.

.

.

So there you go i'll let you decide.

Sign it if it makes you feel better but you would be far better off supporting a organisation with teeth to take on the E.A. Remember, "Power corrupts and absolute power corupts absolutley"

 

OP-JB

[Alan Fawcett]

OP-JB.

 

>Why are you so paranoid? Nobody is going to >abolish angling,

 

Thats what a hell of a lot of fox hunters said along with "its an ancient sport enjoyed by royalty so it will never happen" look what happened in Scotland & is already a forgone conclusion in England.

 

>The anglers wont be sponging off anyone. Think >of the amount of money we spend on our tackle. >The responsible anglers will support worthy >organisations who lobby, procecute and develop.

 

How many members of non angling public are going to think along those lines?? & the same with the anti's ?

Can you see an anti saying "oh but of course we musn't forget how much money is raised in taxes from the sale of angling related goods"??

 

3) Why are two non angling MP's interested in helping angling?? (hidden agenda maybe?)

 

>Who cares? We are a group of over 1000,000.

 

Yes but they are in parliment & we aren't so who are the non angling public going to believe??

 

4) while we pay we have a say (well to some extent)

 

>Dont we have a say as British Citizens?

 

Well we should but has the goverment listened to us over europe or the "pounds & ounces" debate?

Sorry but an 11.40kg fish just doesn't sound the same as a 25lb 1oz fish.

 

In fact when was the last time the goverment actually listened to the "people" :confused:

[Allan]

Does anyone know, if canoeists need a licence? these can be a real menace on the narower upper reaches of some rivers, especially the Bristol Avon.

[OP-JB]

Alan,

 

The labour party got into goverment by playing various cards. The abolishment of the pursuit to the death of the fox by hounds and rich people was one. That, my friend was a class thing, a kick at the tories falling from `grace`.

You continue to talk up the possibilities of the same thing happening to fishing. Rest easy(*)because, banning fishing is not a vote winner, it`s a vote looser, fish don`t draw the same emotion as the fox, over 1,000,000 people fish and fishermen comme from all walks of life without class distinction. The public are ANGLERS but I bet PETA love you, your giving them a foothold. Incidently, did you know the R.S.P.C.A. are anti-Angling? Now that poses a real moral question.

 

(*)Zzzzzz

 

OP -JB

 

nope, nope and who?

[Alan Fawcett]

Hi OP

 

Thanks for the reply.

 

Its no secret about the RSPCA thats why even though its been years since lead shot was banned they still try to blame us for the lead poisoning suffered by swans etc.

 

As for PETA loving me you could be right there but answear me this:

Would you know a member of an anti group if you saw one?

 

I know of a whole group of anglers who post on here & they are members of various anti groups.

 

Sitting, watching waiting & reporting to certain groups who are preparing the fight against them.

These groups aren't little unheard of groups but some of the biggest in the angling fraternity & if they believe theres a threat to angling why can't you?

 

The anti's love the rifts they cause amongst angling groups by posting on BB's like this one.

 

They also buy the angling comics every week & look for pictures & articles to cut out so they can be used against us, this i know for a fact.

 

If the public are anglers then why are there only 1,000,000 of us instead of 7,000,000 or more?

 

Why do i still get asked "don't you think its cruel to catch fish?" , "whats the use of fishing?", "don't you ever get bored sitting there??" , "why do you go fishing?", "Haven't you got anything better to do?" & of course the classic "how many have you killed today then?".

 

I know not everyone will have been asked the same questions as me but they still get asked & if as you say the public are anglers then why do they ask these questions?

 

deleated large part because i don't want to be responsible for another thread becoming political

 

Anyway enough of that, this thread was about a group of fellas wanting to abolish the rod licence & on all the sites i've posted this same thing only one person has been in favour of it.

 

[ 14 March 2002, 01:04 PM: Message edited by: ALAN FAWCETT ]

[OP-JB]

Try fishandfly.You can post as a guest. Be interested to see what that lot think. Thanks for taking me to task though. See you there.

 

OP -JB