EA licences

[Guest trent.barbeler]

Hi All,

 

With regards to anglers NOT buying a rod licence and Bruno asking for figures or proof relating to licence evasion?

 

Quite simply, the EA themselves and our court sytstem have all of this information freely available to all.

 

Some are quoting how many rod licences that are getting checked every year. These figures are probably correct.

 

Tell me then, out of the whole number of anglers that are checked by the EA enforcement officers on the bank, just how many were subsequently prosecuted for NOT having a rod licence?

 

In certain area's, the EA enforcement officers target specific venues. Why do they do that. Is it on a hunch? Or simply something done on a rotation basis around the country?

 

Or is it because they know full well from previous checks undertaken that there is a big problem in certain area's with regards to licence evasion?

 

Look at the number of prosecutions in relation to the amount of licences checked by the EA enforcement officers. From those figures work out a simple percentage of the numbers of anglers actually caught fishing without a rod licence. Then apply these figures as an average against the number of anglers in the country. Instead of asking me to produce these figures, do it for yourselves because I have already done it.

 

High praise, deservedly so, has been heaped on the EA fisheries guys and the valuable work that they do for angling.

 

With regards to fisheries and working with the EA fisheries officers, I know only to well how hard the work is because I have worked along side them many times. Bruno will tell you, I am sure, just what hard work it is pulling a seine net in full of fish. Then sorting all the netted fish out into floating holding cages then into tanks for transportaion to other venues and going with the tanks to release the netted fish. This work will actually take the skin off your fingers after a couple of days of sorting fish stocks.

 

Many ,many times I have worked with guys like Ruben Page and other EA fisheries officers whilst out working with Grantham AA undertaking netting, weed clearance and a host of other fisheries related VOLUNTARY work, year after year, after year.

 

Although it may not seem like it to some, I actally do as well as talk and know from first hand experience how hard/valuable fisheries officers/volunteers work is.

 

For all that, I happen to believe that the rod licencing system is not working properly. I happen to believe that anglers are paying a great deal whilst other water users are paying very little. Based on ACTUAL FIGURES, I happen to believe that anglers who are not buying a rod licence, who ARE growing in number, are being proped up by those that do and to compensate for this, the rod licence fee rises year on year.

 

Putting up the price of a rod licence year on year does not address the problem. It just papers over the cracks.

 

The "Environment" is shared by all. Not just anglers but everyone. But not everyone is making a contribution.

 

Clean rivers, by the way, are related to the EA policing them. Now, as in the past.

All rivers eventually flow into the sea. Does that make for a cleaner environment around our coastline?

In times when our coastline is under threat from major oil spillage, do the EA become involved or sit back and do nothing.

 

As I say, the environment is shared by all. Not just course and game anglers.

 

Bruno ends one of his posts by stating "lets get rid of rod licences". Good point.

 

Then perhaps we could look at everyone, not just anglers, footing the EA bill. Remember, the EA remit goes far beyond fisheries work.

Should the government be providing ALL funds required to protect our environment in all the area's that the EA work in seeing as healthy fish are the best indicators of cleaner rivers, waterways and stillwaters.

 

Successive governments make a great deal about environmental issues when election time comes around. I happen to be one, that thinks its high time that once in power, they start to put EVERYONES money where their mouths are and start to do something really positive for the environment that we ALL have to share.

 

Cleaner water and fishery services influence and effect environments that not just anglers benefit from. But anglers are constantly expected to be solely responsible for their upkeep.

 

A fair alternative? Once again, back to basic mathematics.

 

How much money do the Environment Agency require to do a highly effective job within every area it works. Not merely amounts to scape by, but an amount to do their job properly and a job that everyone, not just anglers would benefit from? Or take the amount its coffers receive now as a starting point.

 

Then divide that amount by every member of this country's population over the age of 18. Work it out yourselves then you will see just how pitiful the individual amount per person per year, really is.

 

An environmental tax? Given the fact that we as a nation are supposed to be very concerned about our environment, why not? We as caring anglers gladly pay £20 per year so anglers surely, would all be for EVERYONE paying a pittance in comparison to what they have to pay themselves now.

 

At least then EVERYONE makes a contribution to our healthy and sustained environments and the EA is properly funded with enough money to do its job effectively without having to make cut backs here and there.

 

Unless questions are asked and alternatives suggested, the EA will continue to be strapped of proper funding.

 

The environment is shared by all. My suggestion is that all start paying for its upkeep and protection. Collectively, as a nation united for its own interest.

 

I have no assumed selfishness or hidden reasons behind my opinions on this matter. But unless questions are asked and alternatives suggested, we will never see an Environment Agency capable of being properly funded with enough cash that would enable it to do the job that itself, would like to see done for our environment.

 

Regards,

 

Lee.