Lets put it in a box and leave it behind

[wotnobivvy]

Totally agree with Dales last post. To paraphrase the title of this thread, can we put it in a box and bury it, it's going nowhere

[Brian Carragher]

Totally agree with the above , thats why I've not posted till now. You can't have a serious discussion/debate with someone who flip flops all over the place every time he's shown to be wrong and introduces new grievances every time he leads himself up a blind alley

 

He's no angler, not even sure he's a canoeist given he only goes once a year but he sure is one very "Victor Meldrew" type character who just wants to rant and rave on every topic and every posting

 

The best way to respond to Andy Young's postings is simple; DON'T, that way at least he'll only be able to direct his dislike of everything at himself

[chesters1]

Totally agree with the above , thats why I've not posted till now. You can't have a serious discussion/debate with someone who flip flops all over the place every time he's shown to be wrong and introduces new grievances every time he leads himself up a blind alley

 

He's no angler, not even sure he's a canoeist given he only goes once a year but he sure is one very "Victor Meldrew" type character who just wants to rant and rave on every topic and every posting

 

The best way to respond to Andy Young's postings is simple; DON'T, that way at least he'll only be able to direct his dislike of everything at himself

WHAAAT and spoil the fun

[Steve Walker]

Basic disagreement about whether rivers and the right to make use of them should be private property.

 

Current arrangement suits anglers because they don't each need very much river, are willing to pay for access, and don't like sharing with other water users because it results in their own needs being trampled.

 

Arrangement doesn't suit paddlers because they need lots of river, aren't willing to pay for it and don't mind sharing because it only results in them trampling other people's needs.

 

Nothing for angling to gain from changing the status quo, why discuss it?

[Phone]

All,

 

I agree with Androo, not much else happening. Andy Y. introduced a thread that suggests he wants to (river) canoe anywhere anglers can fish. Maybe not? Early, in post#3 he took on barbel. And then he took on - - and - - on - - and - - on. Provoked by idiots like me he willingly takes the bait.

 

That's what we anglers do - go fishing. Andy Y. is like angling for carp in an overstocked puddle. I'm almost of the opinion he can't help it. It's no longer about canoe access - it's about trolling for Andy Y. (Looks like Chesters1 shoaled up a bit as well)

 

We name fish, I guess it's Ok to name anglers who sucker bait like fish.

 

It's fun - execpt now it's at a "persons" expense. I quit - put 'em in the net and release 'em.

 

Phone

[Rob Ward]

I'll recap again. Both rivers are Special Areas of Conservation because of certain endangered species that live in them. Barbel were artificially introduced into both of these rivers, and they predate on all the endangered species that live there.

 

I think you'll find that wasn't the case with the Wensum, see my earlier post on about page five. There would have been Barbel in the Wensum long before Anglers started keeping records. Probably long before Anglers...

Edited April 12, 2012 by Rob Ward

[andy_youngs]

the reason this topic has got a lot of replies is not because anyone cares particularly, it's just there's not much else to talk about right now

OK

[andy_youngs]

Andy Young: Regards my using the word 'hypocrite' that you seem so upset about;

 

1. This was not directed at you so I fail to see why you have a bee in your bonnet about it. Except of course that you are clutching at straws in trying to gain a little lost ground.

 

2. As KenL has already pointed out; you have a very loose grasp of the Engligh language. In thr instance that I used the word 'hypocrite' was to describe Chesters1 who suggests on numerous occassions that rules are for breaking yet acts as a club official enforcing club rules and in his own words 'escorting persons off the premises'. The use of the word 'hypocrite' in this context is not abusive, but a description of the situation and of the person.

 

I really think the BCU needs another champion. You don't seem to be doing very well.

Nicepix,

 

It's not me that got a bee in his bonnet about the hypocrite word, it's the mods. As far as I'm concerned, that word gets thrown across the floor of the House of Commons every day, so I don't really see that you have anything to reproach yourself for.

 

It's just that generally in life, if you sling mud, then you lose ground.

 

I have never been a member of the BCU, and I have no intention of joining that organisation.

[andy_youngs]

Nothing for angling to gain from changing the status quo, why discuss it?

Erm, I think I'd throw that one back at you Steve ... sure, I started this thread, but why post if you don't want to discuss it?

Edited April 13, 2012 by andy_youngs

[andy_youngs]

Sorry but if you re-read my post, you will see that "lying" was not there. From post #76

Correction duly acknowledged. The offending words are : "fascist", "hypocrite", "bully".

 

For the record, I feel that government agencies and politicians are public figures and fair game for most of the names you want to call them and most seem to lie when it suits them.

I agree

Edited April 13, 2012 by andy_youngs