Butt out CA!

[mark barrett]

peter i am quite well aware as to what the CA's "hidden" agenda is, but if they want to use our weight of numbers to fight that corner thats fine by me as i am opposed to the banning of hunting with dogs.

 

i think a few people on here that are so anti fox hunting ought to think a bit further before pledging their support. the government proposal is to ban ALL hunting with dogs. now in theory this could lead to some people having some restrictions put on them that they are not thinking of at all. after all i bet that there are a good few people on here that own dogs. now it is very possible that by allowing your dog off a lead in the countryside that you could be prosecuted for allowing your dog to hunt wild animals. how? well if you are walking your dog it will hunt, dogs prime role in life is to hunt for food so it is second nature. now if that dog hunts up and flushes a rabbit and then gives chase, that is hunting with a dog. so be prepared to walk your dog on a lead always if this ill thought out, draconian legislation comes to law.

[northern mark]

Gobio

My point is that insted of moaning about the CA representing us we should be doing something about it.

 

I am also with Fenboy and Peter Waller, but what do we do about it.

 

There is an anglers register on another site, if all the registered anglers sent an E-mail telling Mr Jardine of their feeling about being represented by the CA one way or the other at least then we are doing something.

 

Mark, I agree with you also on the what is hunting with dogs.

 

Mark

[Peter Waller]

In a nutshell Mark, that the CA has associated itself, unasked, with Angling means that we could be seen as guilty by association, and we are not!

[Cranfield]

Peter, you trot out the same rhetoric on every occasion.

"The CA doesn't represent me".

 

Well, the CA doesn't claim to represent you.

Just like the PAC, SA, NFA, etc etc doesn't claim to represent me, although they would, if I decided to join their membership.

 

All the time you are not a member of the CA, it doesn't represent you.

 

Should I complain that PAC claims to represent all pike anglers and although I fish for pike, I don't want it to represent me.

That would be a ludicrous stand to take, but one you may recognise.

[Peter Waller]

The CA has a Campaign For Angling. Not a campaign for angling members of the CA, but for Angling.

 

The PAC represents itself, not Angling.

 

I'm sorry Cranfield, I find your arguement a tenuous one.

[Ian FG]

OK nothern mark, good point about the CA.

Not sure If I agree with you and mark barrett about this hunting with dogs argument though. I don't recall any dog walkers from Scotland being charged....I'm sure you know that hunting with dogs is illegal there.

[nature boy]

i think waller must be board again,starting a ca thread again and again and again and again and again and again.zzzzz zzzzzz zzzzzz zzzzzz

 

[ 15. August 2004, 09:14 PM: Message edited by: nature boy ]

[Cranfield]

PAC = Pike Anglers Club.

Cranfield = Pike Angler.

 

Sorry, Peter, there is nothing tenuous about that.

[Peter Waller]

For those of you who want to let Charles Jardine and the Countryside Alliance know of your feelings, either anti or pro CA involvement in Angling, e-mail your thoughts to:-

charles-jardine@countryside-alliance.org

[Webbo]

I've just been reading this thread with interest as it's not the first time I've seen debates regarding the CA's link with angling.

I'm not a member of the Countryside Alliance, I don't support Fox hunting but I am an avid angler and much as though I would like to say, we as anglers do not have a truly representative voice who will jump to our defence at the drop of a hat.

This is where the CA differs.

 

The newsletters I receive from them, press releases, snippets of information, etc, are numerous and they don't delay in jumping into the affray to defend angling or to launch an attack when something that affects our sport hits the news-stands - I can't say I have seen this from any of our other supportive bodies, in fact it takes a virtual sport rocking bomb to prompt some of them to even consider standing above the parapet and voice their opinions, jumping to our defence.

 

They'll always be the argument that the main bodies are not in that position due to lack of funding - how much does it cost to send a letter, an email or make a few phone calls? You don't need fancy offices in order to do so as proven by the posters of this and other sites; it only takes a minute to put the keyboard into action.

 

The CA on the other hand doesn't wait until the proverbial has hit the fan, the dust has settled, and the damage has been done before coming to the conclusion that they should have said something. Like it or lump it they just seem to wade straight in and pack a few punches

Yes there may be an alternative agenda in this but when your options are few and far between are they such a bad thing, do we need to stand by and take every battering that comes our way waiting for the 7th calvary to come over the hill to our rescue - it's too late when the damage has been done

 

We at MD's recently started an anglers register

'The UK Angler's Register' as it became titled originated from a similar forum discussion where it was the general concensus that we as anglers needed a register of some kind whereas everyone could be be bought together regardless of which branch of angling they participated in with the common aim of becoming one voice.

The aim was not to champion every argument but to use it as a rallying call to all anglers out there should the need arise so that not one, not two, but as many of us as possible could be prompted into sending that email, writing that letter, making the phonecall, should the need arise - that's where the one voice will come into it's own - when we as anglers collectively raise our heads above the parapet and shout out in defence of our sport

Until such time arises the CA are the only voice that the media gets to hear on a regular basis regardless of whether or not the majority of anglers agree that they should be our spokespersons

 

(The register is on the lower-left of our homepage if anyone wants to join it or add it to their website)

 

All the best,

 

Dave