The 3m Farce

[chesters1]

rules are there for some reason either they are followed blindly or they are silly and you try to get them changed.

driving licences are stupid but most people wouldn't drive without one ,a licence has never made the driver a good driver and probably 95% of accidents are caused by drivers with licences.

everyone has free choice they obey rules or they do not ,its entirely up to you

you give the rule maker the power to make rules ,if you don't like them object

 

i went past a building site today ,i could not see what was going on because of the amount of signs warning you of rules that need taking into consideration ,some arse dreams them up most are common sense but some bastard gets paid to make the damn things up,you cannot get away from rules as soon as you step over your doorstep going out and hundreds no doubt covering where you came from .life is not as free as some think

 

if i were in a wheelchair could i cover a 3m spread of rods as easily as a fit person ,be careful what you wish for the distance could be nearer to respect a disabled anglers outlook in this land of so called equality

Edited February 22, 2012 by chesters1

[Dave H]

rules are there for some reason either they are followed blindly or they are silly and you try to get them changed.

driving licences are stupid but most people wouldn't drive without one ,a licence has never made the driver a good driver and probably 95% of accidents are caused by drivers with licences.

everyone has free choice they obey rules or they do not ,its entirely up to you

 

Nope not changed but discussed. The law (sometimes the rules) have to be abided at all times but discussion on the is freedom of speech. Rules have been over turned by freedom of speech but that is not always the intention. If you want an answer I agree with the ruling but if i had not i would still abide with it .

freedom of speach has over turned rules and that is why we are a democracy.

 

Anyway Budgie has done the dirty on me so i am off to sulk

[chesters1]

Nope not changed but discussed. The law (sometimes the rules) have to be abided at all times but discussion on the is freedom of speech. Rules have been over turned by freedom of speech but that is not always the intention. If you want an answer I agree with the ruling but if i had not i would still abide with it .

freedom of speach has over turned rules and that is why we are a democracy.

 

Anyway Budgie has done the dirty on me so i am off to sulk

 

there is no democracy in the UK ,you power is given away to others to do with as they please ,if 1.8 million people couldnt get the petrol tax? abolished then you have no chance ,you need blood on the streets to get noticed

there is no free speech a certain "cleric" just out of nick was banged up for 9 years with no trial nor guilt found in a real democracy he can say what he wishes

remember if things don't change they remain the same

someone decided 3metres was the number ,obey or challenge it! the balance is difficult though just a handful to get it into the rules but many many more to get it changed ,power corrupts and those with it hate being forced to change their thinking ,its to them having their power challenged

laws remember only apply to the law abiding

Edited February 22, 2012 by chesters1

[Dick Dastardly]

Nope not changed but discussed. The law (sometimes the rules) have to be abided at all times but discussion on the is freedom of speech. Rules have been over turned by freedom of speech but that is not always the intention. If you want an answer I agree with the ruling but if i had not i would still abide with it .

freedom of speach has over turned rules and that is why we are a democracy.

 

Anyway Budgie has done the dirty on me so i am off to sulk

 

Sorry mate!

 

I agree with all whats been said about getting rules changed BUT before this is possible anglers need to be a lot more united on an issue.Im going about raising this subject this way because I aim to try and point out the real facts behind this rule and how (all though many dont see it yet) it does indeed apply to them. Some one at the very start of this thread raised what I consider to be my biggest worry....and that is that contesting this rule could potentially open a whole can of worms! As such it may be better to just leave sleeping dogs lie (as indeed also previously raised) its very unlikely for you to be caught............................UNLESS bubbled by another angler and that's why I would prefer to try and make people aware of the real facts behind this and how it will/could affect all. Regardless of if they yet realise or accept this.

[Phone]

BUDGIE,

 

Respectfully, we disagree.

 

Your point #1 is arbitrary and capricious. I don't believe any "facts" could possibly be gathered on "deep hooking" and rod butt location. #1 is at best a Phonism.

 

#2. Number of rods is ultimately T H E issue. Further it has no affect/effect on your #10. #10 does not mention "butt distance" as a factor in relationship to the anglers location. It talks about "unattended" and "sufficient control". I believe you are wrong as to the PURPOSE of 3m.

 

#3. For the above #3 is obviously flawed. You may be able to cite an angler for "either or" and maybe both - but they are not mentioned as being particularly related.

 

The need for a 3m rule must be related to the number of rods allowed. Has nothing to do with "fish safety" - that's BS.

 

Phone

[Dick Dastardly]

Phone the number of rods allowed is allready legislated for-

 

Rod limits

National byelaw - number of rods

 

The maximum number of rods that you can fish with varies according to the type of water and fishing. The table below gives details of rod limits - these are subject to the correct number of licences being held. This only applies to rods actually in use - you can have as many as you wish set up.

 

 

Types of Fish

Rivers, streams, drains and canals

Reservoirs, lakes and ponds

 

Salmon and sea trout

(migratory trout)

1 rod

2 rods*

 

Trout (non-migratory) and Char 1 rod

2 rods*

 

Course fish and eels 4 rods*

4 rods*

 

 

 

* 2 licences required

 

When fishing with multiple rods and lines, rods must be placed so that the distance between the butts of the end rods does not exceed three metres.

 

A salmon and sea trout licence authorises only one rod per licence when fishing for salmon, sea trout or trout, or two rods per licence when fishing for coarse fish and eels.

 

A trout and coarse licence authorises one rod when fishing for trout, or two rods when fishing for coarse fish and eels.

[Dick Dastardly]

BUDGIE,

 

Respectfully, we disagree.

 

Your point #1 is arbitrary and capricious. I don't believe any "facts" could possibly be gathered on "deep hooking" and rod butt location. #1 is at best a Phonism.

 

 

This is purely what pikers who use this method belive and the reason they practise it.

[Dick Dastardly]

Phone here are our rules if it helps-

 

http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/homea...hing/31465.aspx

[John Weddup]

Well my turn now as most of the points I wanted to discuss have now been raised. A confession first though,I have told a bit of a lie to get this thread started and no one has actually been caught,all though people have in the past and prosecuted. So sorry for that but it has served its purpose.

 

Well it seems that everyone has replied in much the same way I suspected. A great example of how "un united" angling is.

 

I cant believe how selfish and self righteous so many are!

 

First of all it grips me that people who either dont use multiple rod tactics or pike fish feel they can have the right to criticise! By all means have an opinion or disagree if you have experience of something but to take the moral high ground simply because you can?

 

This is how I see some of the facts that relate to this issue-

 

1, Pikers spread rods rather than "fanning them out"! as this indeed helps bite detection and so avoids deep hooking.

 

2, Number of rods used is an irrelevance with this issue.Four are allowed so four can be used.The practicality/"correctness"/"sporting ethic" of doing such is totally different issue and is as individual as each angler and situation so as such not possible to legislate.

 

3, The rule is basically brought in to back up (and help make enforcing easier) another rule ie-

 

10.Unattended rods

Confirmed 26th May 2001

Date of implementation 27th May 2001

Any person who leaves a rod and line with its bait or hook in the water unattended or so that the person shall be

unable at any time to take or exercise sufficient control over said rod and line shall be guilty of an offence

 

So basically what the "3m rule" is intended to do is ensure that an angler is in a position to be able to supervise and correctly monitor his rods at all times? Certainly not to restrict numbers of rods used or bank space taken up or enforce any form of "sporting ethic"?

 

So what are your opinions on this then (regardless of if you fish for pike,use multiple rods or think its sporting or not) Purely my interpretation of the "reason behind" the "3m rule"?

 

 

I sat here eating my lunch and thought a good thread would be how angling forums in general but AN espescially have such an intolerant bunch as regards other types of angling and methods.

 

We shouldn't do this, that or the other and sometimes I wonder if there is any form of angling OK with everyone here.

 

The 3m rule is enforced to a ridiculous level when bailiffs talk of measuring it. Even Speeding offences get a certain leaway.

 

I agree with your interpretation of what the 3m rule was intended for.

 

I also think anglers with short legs should be restricted to 2m whereas those of a longer leg should be allowed 4m. Maybe some sort of speed and agility training could be employed to allow a differing licence system before anyone is allowed to use more than one rod.

 

John

[chesters1]

perhaps a 1 ft long rubber 90 degree butt extension could get around the problem ,a bit like the sidecar get out decades ago when the rules about motor bike engine capacity was changed ,some rules are easily bent until another rule comes out

perhaps a sprung loaded extension butt could be made that was half the length of your real one that rested on a rod rest and when you lifted your rod it sprung agaist the real butt ,on two rods that could get you another meter.

is there a rule about having a very long butt ,i thought not

Edited February 22, 2012 by chesters1