Who represents us? A serious question!

[rob.i]

[kleinboet]

I think most of you, taking the p*ss out of the CA (which I agree with) are missing the point.

The CA are attending shows and setting up their stall in the PUBLIC EYE! Leon, you and I know, works tirelessly for angling, but who, apart from the converted, know this!

As Mark Barret said The CA was at the Fenland Show - seen be THOUSANDS of people, yet ANGLING as a whole, was not there. Sure, PAC was there but we, the anglers, have no-one to represent US at these shows, and all we do on threads like these, is tell one another that this or that organisation is a joke, or state flatly that you will NOT join any organisation apart from the ones YOU are actively backing.

Instead of decrying all the various organisations, lets get together, decide on the right organisation, and join it, work at it and,as Jim Kelly said about the CA, "changing things to our taste". THEN we can put in an appearance at shows and put OUR point of view over.

 

[ 02. September 2004, 08:06 AM: Message edited by: kleinboet ]

[Peter Waller]

But Kleinboet, that is the issue! Do anglers really want to be seen as being represented by the CA?

 

Personally I don't. I would rather be completely out of the public eye rather than being seen as associating with the CA.

[kleinboet]

Peter, read my posting again, I would like to see ALL anglers from EVERY dicipline support ONE angling organisation and "changing things to our taste" What we need is an organisation which will set up at thes shows and give the public the anglers point of view. The CA are giving the public their view and dragging angling into it. With our own organisation they will learn that no (or at worst, very few) fish were harmed in pusuant of our hobby, unlike CA blood "sports"

 

[ 02. September 2004, 06:20 PM: Message edited by: kleinboet ]

[Peter Waller]

Very fair comment Kleinboet. I agree 100%.

[Leon Roskilly]

kleinboet:

 With our own organisation they will learn that no (or at worst, very few) fish were harmed in pusuant of our hobby, unlike CA blood "sports"

Er, actually quite a lot of trout salmon and sea fish get bonked on the head!

 

Most of the (fish eating) public are happy with that concept.

 

It's the practice of coarse fishermen who drag fish out of the water and put them back again, simply for their own amusement, that more people have difficulty with!!

 

Tight Lines - leon

[Bruno Broughton]

Leon Roskilly:

It's the practice of coarse fishermen who drag fish out of the water and put them back again, simply for their own amusement, that more people have difficulty with!!

Times are achanging, Leon - a LOT of salmon & sea trout are now caught & released. With spring salmon, it's the law!

 

The general public is influenced by rhetoric. "Dragging fish out of the water... simply for their own amusement" is one version. You could have added "thrown them back" as garnish.

 

A far more accurate one is: "Using my skill to outwit a fish, unhook it carefully and release it unharmed, if a little wiser, to grow bigger". I have never had a problem with the general public in this country with that explanation. True, they see it as a little whacky but also perfectly acceptible. Naturally, I exclude vegans from that generalisation.

 

Catch & release or catch & kill? Hey, until the point of death (or not) the fish has undergone exactly the same experience, as has the angler. So where is the problem? I just look the fish in the eyes and ask a simple question: "Would you rather be killed or released?"

 

Guess what? I swear that the fish's body language says 'Do an Engelbert'

 

(one, two, three, four) "Please release me, let me go".

 

So I do, with a clear conscience

 

[ 03. September 2004, 01:24 AM: Message edited by: Bruno Broughton ]

[kleinboet]

Bruno has got it absolutely right. If someone is still unsure, I then ask them to explain why I can catch the SAME fish several times in a session. Surely that proves the point that if the angler was traumatising the fish that much, it wouldn't go near a hook for a week, let alone a few hours or less!

[wearyone]

Many migratory anglers here in the North East refused to buy a licence when 'catch and release' was introduced.They maintain that's its in the fish's best interest to be knocked on the head. What are theses people, anglers or fishmongers?

 

When catch and release was first introduced, I complained at a North East fisheries meeting about the disproportionate increase in rod licence fees i.e. both coarse and migratory went up by £1-00, the reply was - we are having to compensate the migratory anglers for not being able to keep their catch until June 16th. At that I replied, on that basis coarse anglers should have a reduction, as we release ALL fish.

I also asked, as there is a differential in the two licences, why then is the migratory ALWAYS a lower percentage increase? Year on year we (coarse anglers) contribute more with each across the board increase.

 

Bruno, I think the theory about fish becoming wiser applies more the Chub from North Eastern waters than it does to southern fish. We never seem to see them after they attain the size of about 5lb. On the other hand, ALL southern chub must be pretty stupid, and never learn.

 

[ 03. September 2004, 01:27 PM: Message edited by: wearyone ]

[kleinboet]

I have brought this back to the top because of "Screaming Reels" The progam shown this weekend is about the Comorant situation. It was clearly shown what damage the comorants are doing to fish stocks, but the RSPB insist that things like screamers, fireworks and all the other useless rubbish is adequate to deter them and, BECAUSE WE CANNOT CHALLENGE THEM AS A GROUP, their point of view is accepted.

We need a representative body and we need it NOW!!!