Have you ever had to produce your Licence ever?

[Vagabond]

Think very carefully before complaining that licences are rarely checked

 

 

 

There are a number of strategies possible in policing our waters Many officers (which means many salaries) carrying out frequent checks would increase the cost of licences - without much to spare for the fisheries themselves.

 

On the other hand, few checks, but draconian fines for offenders, would seem a better option - provided the fines went into the "fishery improvement" kitty.

 

Either way, the sum effect of all the "sins" of all the anglers in the country are trivial compared with the environmental damage caused by industrialists, and even by public bodies.

 

That said, I have never, ever been asked for my licence on a river - that's in 75 years of river angling - even when I went seatrout fishing with an R.B bailiff (yes, that was when we still had River Boards) he didn't check my licence.

 

I was once checked on one of my rare visits to a commercial set of ponds - the bailiff was astounded when I produced a salmon licence ! ............also once at a put-n-take rainbow fishery

 

PS, I have frequently been asked to show my permit by fellow syndicate/club members, have always shown it, provided they show me theirs. (No jokes please ) ...

 

Older members may recall a story of a permit-less busybody who was unwise enough to challenge me in a hectoring manner.

 

 

I thought I had seen this before ! Just checked back - I answered three or four years ago !

 

Said the same things then as now

Edited May 17, 2017 by Vagabond

[chesters1]

All the chaps who mentioned theirs were late got theirs a couple of weeks ago

[Steve Burke]

Unfortunately, and what many don't realise, is that the fines don't go into the "fishery improvement kitty". Instead they go straight to central government!

 

Licence checks cost the Environment Agency money and so the more checks there are, the less the money available for fisheries.

 

On the other hand, no licence checks would mean more anglers would skip buying a licence and so again less money for fisheries.

 

Perhaps the answer would be to ensure all fines go back into fisheries.

 

Comments anyone?

[Phone]

Steve,

 

Of course our system is so different it's hard to do apples to apples. In our case - monies collected do go to the fisheries. Only makes sense.

 

I must say - I am surprised when I'm NOT checked if I am fishing a popular venue. Often "checking" is a matter of a short conversation. For example, if an Englishman who can't talk right and indicated he's on holiday the probability of him not having a license is practically zero. The "agent" marks that as a "check" although nothing was produced by the angler.

 

Phone

[chesters1]

I think those with eyes to close together should be watched intently ,perhaps some indication on birth registration thus followed closely throughout their lives ,if some nice arian blond chaps 'forgets' his licence the nearest eyes to close together chap gets the fine double if theres a hint of complexion about him ,dont ask me about gingers with both other flaws were talking 3 counts and out ,two if they say aboot

 

Theres tales said in hushed voices checks have been made at the pond ,in one case i whitnessed an old fella went home in shame and i refused to show mine as i was checking not fishing ,the chap followed me for a bit but got bored and went off in the van with his mate

 

In regards to fines going to fisheries it can only be rivers clubs shouldn't gain for not bringing in a rule their members require to pay a fishing tax ,but do we really need more EA interference in buggering up rivers?

They keep taking mandies old mans land and putting it in lorries and at the first flood another lots deposits silt in the bit they just cleared ,the fricking river looks awful its twice as wide as it should be .

English fricking heritage are just as useless they just found an arch they never new existed depite it being mentioned in 1929 in bridges of the river wey! And was seen as late as 2005 before the EA started causing silt to be disturbed upstream at farnham

Both useless organisation that should be abolished

Edited May 19, 2017 by chesters1

[Vagabond]

i refused to show mine as i was checking not fishing ,the chap followed me for a bit but got bored and went off in the van with his mate

Love it !!

 

I remember sitting somewhere, filling my pipe ready for lighting up when I left, and some officious twerp barking "NO SMOKING" at ,me

 

"I'm not smoking" I replied

 

OT "You have a pipe in your hands"

 

Me "I have a pair of shoes on my feet, but I.m not walking"

[Steve Walker]

Dave - I have a friend who had a very similar conversation about his making of a roll-up, but his description of what he had and wasn't currently using was somewhat more vulgar!

[chesters1]

Love it !!

 

I remember sitting somewhere, filling my pipe ready for lighting up when I left, and some officious twerp barking "NO SMOKING" at ,me

 

"I'm not smoking" I replied

 

OT "You have a pipe in your hands"

 

Me "I have a pair of shoes on my feet, but I.m not walking"

LOL

[Latimeria]

Steve Burke, on 17 May 2017 - 22:30, said:

Unfortunately, and what many don't realise, is that the fines don't go into the "fishery improvement kitty". Instead they go straight to central government!

 

Licence checks cost the Environment Agency money and so the more checks there are, the less the money available for fisheries.

 

On the other hand, no licence checks would mean more anglers would skip buying a licence and so again less money for fisheries.

 

Perhaps the answer would be to ensure all fines go back into fisheries.

 

Comments anyone?

 

Exactly. Licence checks are paid for by anglers, yet we receive very little tangible benefit back, in effect we are paying to generate a funding stream for government, actually reducing the amount of money available to fisheries from the ring-fenced revenue. The licence should be binned anyway, clean waterways and a healthy ecology should be a cost borne by a developed and mature democracy (cynical lol), with access to inland fisheries potentially available to every citizen who obtains the required permission from land/lease owners.

[mdgfishing]

!n the last 5 years 4 times, in the last 50 years about 12 one year on the

Trent 3 time by the same balliff.