Pike Anglers: Compulsory Courses?

[Emma two]

Some seem to advance from the notion that everyone who goes out fishin' is like them, in that they read the angling mags, visist the fishin' websites and watch sky tv programes, a significantly join clubs, well they don't, some are seasonal anglers, so its something to do in summer when everything else (shootin hunting etc) is out if season. Some don't engage with any fieldsport at all but pick up a rod and tacke a few days a year, draconian legislation is likely to drive them from the waterside, or is that really the agenda? so that an elete can set themselves up above the 'ordinary folk', only the holders of knowledge may seek the sacred fish...what aload of bureaucratic rubbish.

[Emma two]

On a club water?

 

 

Of course not...thats part of the point I am trying to make. We don't all 'do' clubs.

[Anderoo]

Of course not...thats part of the point I am trying to make. We don't all 'do' clubs.

 

So how would schemes like this make any difference to you or others in your position whatsoever?

 

What do you think of the FAS scheme?

[Dales]

So what about the FAS scheme do you object to, and why shouldn't other clubs/organisations follow suit?

 

FAS Scheme looks like an ok scheme. I was in the market for a new club recently and looked at this club and liked the waters they had and the fact they had specimen fish. I decided against joining and have another club in mind for the new season. But if I had joined I would have gone to a Teach In and may well have enjoyed it. Most of Farnham's Pike rules seem good and this no doubt reflects an active Pike/Specimen anglers lobby within the club and so the Pike Teach Ins and more importantly the standard club Pike Fishing rules are in keeping with most Pikers expectations.

 

However as I said I was looking for a new club and so have gone over loads of club rules over the last few months, some I had looked at in previous years and many have added extra rules on Piking. Not many about handling, but loads have gained the following.

 

1. No Live Baits

2. Pike Fishing Only Oct - Mar

3. No Pike Gags (Good)

4. No retaining Pike (Good)

5. Restrictions on number of rods

6. Restriction on bait size that can be taken for lives

7. All lives baits to have wire (Perchers)

8. No spinning outside Pike season

9. Minimum Net Size

10. Single Hooks Only

11. Barbed Only, Semi Barbed and worst of all Barbless Only

12. Set breaking strain wire (Do you want to fish Perch baits on 25 to 30lb wire?)

 

Other then the gag and retaining what Pikers would have voted these rules in?

 

The thing is these coarses would need approving at a club AGM and would be subject to club politics. So a couple of experienced Pike anglers could offer to run these sessions and while being debated at the AGM the match mans lobby throw in a ban on taking live bait and vote it through. It's not very far fetched.

 

Oddly the club I hope to join had this sort of situation, the Pikers had already had lives taken off them by the match lobby. The Pike & Carp anglers then tried to get the rod limit raised from 2 to 3 on certain club waters and it was repeated voted down by pleasure and match anglers. The water in question was a 160 acre reservoir, which those who voted against had never seen and openly declared no interest in fishing

 

The road to hell is paved with good intentions and I am not sure if offered up at a club AGM the result would be as expected. But credit where it is due. If it works for Farnham great, but you would need a strong "clique" to get it on the books in the format you wanted with out some one adding a few unwanted amendments.

 

It's simple at club level, if the majority of the members want it - Go for it.

 

But do clubs reflect the majority's views? Or is it those who shout the most or get involved in the running. FAS may be the good example but I bet it's a mine field to even discuss Pike fishing at lots of clubs.

 

Rules like the company of other rules, has any one one found a club book that just has 1 Pike rule in the handbook?

 

1, Attend Pike coarse and pass, then enjoy your fishing in a safe and appropriate manor at a time of your choosing.

Edited January 18, 2012 by Dales

[gozzer]

EDIT: John, just saw your post. What's the best way for people to overcome the fear of unhooking pike? Show them how to do it. I think assuming that would eventually end up with national legislation and a restriction of liberties is simply paranoid.

 

EDIT 2: And if the people you had to help out on the bank wanted to know how to do it, the information is out there, as are willing advisors, and they had every chance to be prepared before fishing. The fact they didn't just shows that voluntary schemes, while helpful to those who do want to learn, don't address the issue we're discusssing.

 

I'll see your case of paranoia, and raise you some naivety, Andrew.

 

I remember being accused of paranoia many years ago, in my late teens/early twenties. It was popular back then to call for a bigger profile for angling. More media attention, more TV programmes dedicated to angling, etc. I was against it, preferring to be the 'strange soul' who went fishing, 'boring'. I was arguing with a fellow club member, and expressing my fears of what would come with this 'promotion'. I felt it would bring with it rampant commercialism, and angling would be reduced to the level of going to the pictures, ten pin bowling, or any other form of 'entertainment'. It would bring with it those who had no interest in the actual angling, but instead the catching would be the main thing. "Never", I was told, "It can only be for the good of angling". Years later, I saw Meakins fishery, and felt vindicated in my predictions. I have tried to fight it ever since.

If 5 or 10 years ago, I'd have said that angling will be governed/represented at national level, by an unelected body, with less that 1% of anglers as members, I would have been accused of being paranoid, and talking rubbish.

 

These thing can take on a life of their own, (supported by a few influential 'celebs'), and before you realise it, the idea is moving too fast to stop.

 

Oh and as for the rules at Farnham? A good idea, and if you want to fish there, you accept it.

 

John.

[Emma two]

So how would schemes like this make any difference to you or others in your position whatsoever?

 

What do you think of the FAS scheme?

 

Stop moving the goal posts, or at least the question at the top of the thread which is...

 

As an experienced pike angler would you object to having to attend a "handling/Unhooking" course prior to being able to fish a water for pike?

 

I think that John (Gozzer) has put it well enough.

 

I can see that in heavily populated places like lots of you need to live, that you struggle amongst yourself for the limited resources (fish) availiable to you, and so you have to look after the fish so you can take it in turns to catch them. If you have to join a club in order to fish then you have to go by the rules and I suppose that the club committee have a right to set the rules (omg this is toe curling cringe making), however as has been pointed out, before you know where you are its became legislation. across the board.

 

The only technical negative point on the FAS site is the kit list, specifically forceps..I thought we had moved on past those for piking in the 70s

Edited January 18, 2012 by Emma two

[danny2391]

On a club water?

 

 

You are one of the people Emma is talking about assuming all anglers are alike, I have not and never intend to fish a “club “water the mere saying of it makes me cringe I couldn’t think of anything worse. Don’t get me wrong if I was approached while fishing I would happly talk away about fishing the weather general chit chat but I keep myself to myself when fishing the less people I see the better.

It would be a good idea to provide training if people asked for it, but it would be fighting a losing battle trying to make this mandatory.

[JV44]

You are one of the people Emma is talking about assuming all anglers are alike, I have not and never intend to fish a "club "water the mere saying of it makes me cringe I couldn't think of anything worse. Don't get me wrong if I was approached while fishing I would happly talk away about fishing the weather general chit chat but I keep myself to myself when fishing the less people I see the better.

It would be a good idea to provide training if people asked for it, but it would be fighting a losing battle trying to make this mandatory.

 

Danny the thing is round here [and around Anderoo ]you have for the most part to join a club/clubs realy as there is a lack of free water ,I personally would have no problem attending such a course if it saved me having to do surgery as often to remove hooks that are not mine and i might even learn something .

If other clubs pick it up and run with it fine but nationaly cant see it is workable ,If the course showed how to deal with deep hooking so much the better ....would that be possible by utilising already deceased Pike??

[Emma two]

,If the course showed how to deal with deep hooking so much the better ....would that be possible by utilising already deceased Pike??

 

 

That in itself is a fair enough and good idea, they could keep a cavader frozen and thaw it out for each session.

 

Or buy one of these...

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/150669968084?ssP...984.m1439.l2649

Edited January 18, 2012 by Emma two

[Phone]

All,

 

I know we have a slightly different perspective. I'm not quite "getting it"? In C&R there is the "possibility" and there is the "probability" a fish will die. Anyone have a "number" they can throw out? (even a guess) What % of dead fish can be attributed to idiots. They catch so few in relationship to the "better angler" I'd bet the "better angler" kills far more.

 

Is this simply an attempt to prevent "disgusting" angling behaviour? (Is this a - "if we can save just one fish it is worth it" - argument)?

 

Phone