Letter From The Countryside Alliance

[argyll]

Would the CA accept an anti fox hunting angler into their fold?

 

None of the regulars on this forum are qualified to answer Chris, so asking the question will get a completely biased answer.

I suspect the answer might depend on your agenda and what you propose to do about this conviction of yours once you're admitted into membership.

Commonsense suggests that it would be like telling your PAC RO that you're totally opposed to livebaiting.

[Peter M]

slodger:

Incidentally Peter, your not going to tell me that you agree with the ethics of every angler that aligns themself with any of the current angling organisations are you? So why shouldn't a non hunting angler support the CA if he/she believes they are working towards the other rural issues they claim to be?

Can't think of ones i don't agree with, most anglers be they carp barbel pike match anglers, river or commercial pond anglers sea anglers fly anglers, i feel a common allegiance with. people who like hare coursing fox hunting and deer hunting on the other hand i feel i have no allegiance with. if you feel you do then fine join the CA but if you don't then perhaps you shouldn't.

[slodger]

Gerry,

 

I'd expect any RO to accept that the angler has that point of view and welcome him with open arms.

 

Peter M,

 

Peter W frequently feels the need to call into to question other anglers methods or ideas, as most of us do from time to time. That doesn't, I hope, mean that he would not be part of an angling organisation on the basis that he disagreed with some of it's individuals on certain points.

 

For instance he often castigates the long stay carper publically, many of those are going to be SAA members, as is Peter I believe.

 

I've kept coursing dogs in the past, ferreted and shot. I don't any more, and wouldn't want to, however I'm wary of suggesting that others shouldn't. If nothing else it would make something of a hypocrite of me.

[Peter M]

I respect your view slodger and we are going to have to agree to disagree, but i have to say i don't always agree with peter W castigating long stay carpers and any way i sure he just does it in jest now to banter with wordbender. on the question of shooting i respect those who do this although i would not do it myself and would not want the shooting associations to represent angling, just my personal view.

[slodger]

'I respect your view slodger'

 

And I respect yours Peter.

 

I'm still in the wilderness really. To be honest I'm no longer certain what my point of view is.

[Peter Waller]

What, me wind up Wordbender? Never!!

 

I am a member of SAA, it is an angling body that works for angling with, I don't think, any hidden agenda.

 

I am a member of PAC, and as Gerry knows, I'm not comfortable with the ethics of livebaiting. But I still support the PAC, and also what PAC campaigns for.

 

I also support the ACA, despite its recent problems.

 

None of the three above can please all their members all the time. But they can, most of the time. The good in all three far outweighs any bad.

 

As for POPAC, a flawless angling body that I support through thick and thin, a body that can do no wrong!! The Committee and members are the very salt of the earth!

 

The CA I don't see as working for angling, rather that they use angling. In my opinion the bad far outweighs the good. We have been down this path sooooo may times, enough!

 

If the Campaign for Angling was outside the CA, that it resigned from the CA, then I might be pleased to join.

[argyll]

I'd expect any RO to accept that the angler has that point of view and welcome him with open arms.

 

Thats what I'd expect too.

[monkeyboy]

we may not have a representative but please do not let the CA overtake as representative of our sport.

We are fishermen not foxhunters

We are anglers not hunters

We cannot let the ****** speak for us!

 

Lets stop these bumpkins in their tracks trying to tar us with the same brush as foxhunters. Who in my opinion are a waste of space, and the dogs kept in cruel conditions. The beagles deserve more than the fat gits straining the horses!

 

[ 17. March 2005, 03:16 AM: Message edited by: Newt ]

[ARTHUR]

I would not worry about the CA at all let them do whatever they want.

Disturbing reports of the antis are ready to go for fishing next. They see the BASC (thats the shooting lot) as a powerful force but the anties believe that fishing is an easy touch and will go on the war path after the next election.

The only thing holding them back is some sort deal has been done with Blairs lot. The powers that be do not want any disturbance on the streets on the run up to the big day. Think about it.

[Newt]

Errr - monkeyboy, I think the fox hunting folks tended to use more foxhounds than otherwise. Beagles do mostly rabbits.

 

ARTHUR - welcome to the forum. Do you have any specifics on "The only thing holding them back is some sort deal has been done with Blairs lot."? I'm sure lots of the folks on here would like details.