Should we join forces with the Countryside Alliance?

[trent.barbeler]

Dear X,

 

Anti? I think I was correct in my assumption eh?

 

Is the head up ones backside the only argument you can come up with? Anti. Yep.

 

I've more tickets left for the hunt ball by the way. Want some?

[argyll]

I told you once, and I'll tell you again: you'll get a much more balanced perspective if you removed your head from your anus once in a while.

 

No no.. don't thank me.

 

Why would anyone even consider thanking you for such an offensive pile of hogwash. I thought Trent.barbelers perspective was just about as balanced as it could be. I'll resist the temptation to throw some dirt back. News Years resolution.

[Guest sslatter]

trentbarbeler- You know.. with those posts you have singlehandedly done more to distance the ordinary angler from your beloved foxhunting than you can obviously imagine. Keep it up- please!

 

I note too that you only turn up here to post inflammatory remarks about this debate. Got anything about angling to contribute? Or are you just here to stir things up?

[Peter Waller]

Never thought that I would say this Lee, but for once I do not think that your indepth analysis of the situation is helping your own arguement!

 

Oh please, just this once, don't ask me to substantiate my opinion of your considered opinion! All this verbal manouvering is doing my head in!

[Guest sslatter]

argyll: "Why would anyone even consider thanking you for such an offensive pile of hogwash. I thought Trent.barbelers perspective was just about as balanced as it could be."

 

Oh right.. and there was me thinking that Sturmbahnfuhrer Barbeler's comments were just about the most derogatory and offensive thing that I'd read in a long time.. seriously unbalanced, if you ask me..

 

.. and you call yourself an angler? Pah..

[trent.barbeler]

Dear Ant,

 

What about the millions of anglers that haven't joined FACT then? Or the NAA before that?

 

What about the millions of anglers who couldn't give a rats bum what either of us said on any subject we could blather on about concerning angling?

 

We are mere word warts growing inside threads on Anglers Net.

 

Of course you happen to have a personal opinion on the subject. Thats why you posted ain't it?

 

 

Regards,

 

Lee

[Newt]

argyll:

'As I see it this sort of attidude is the only threat to angling and why the majority of anglers deplore the idea of joining forces with the CA'

This comment by argyll seems to hit right at the root of the disagreements on this forum between very sincere folks who come down on both sides of the question.

 

I have to wonder if the majority of UK anglers even notice the whole issue of angling and the CA fighting a common battle. Certainly many of the well informed regulars on here have strong feelings but I don't know how widespread that is.

 

If you are absolutely convinced that angling is under no threat for whatever reason, then it shouldn't be a problem.

 

However, if there is a real threat then since for all it's faults, the CA seems to be doing well at getting the attention of your politicians and it might be nice if protecting angling was a major part of their agenda.

 

To respond to an earlier comment about it being nice that US pols seem pro shooting/angling and support it, you need to know that in many of the US states (and mine is included) a politician who fails to support us will have a near impossible time trying to ever get re-elected. The shooting and angling organizations make it a point to publish voting records in their publications and lots of us base our votes on that data. Not that shooting/angling are the most important issues facing us but more that I just don't trust a politician who is anti-shooting or anti-angling to represent me on any other issues.

 

Note that the last two US presidental canidates who failed to get elected were seen as pro gun control / anti shooting sports based on their past voting record. That obviously wasn't the only reason they failed to be elected but it certainly played a part.

 

I do have to tell you that from a distance it appears from what I read that the threat to UK angling is very real. I hope it works out well but I fear for your sport.

 

[ 17. February 2005, 10:56 PM: Message edited by: Newt ]

[Peter Waller]

Graham X:

.. and you call yourself an angler? Pah..

Up to now I have agreed with most everything that you have said on this subject Graham.

 

Perhaps I have an advantage over you in that I know Argyll from another forum and count him as a friend. Granted he can be a tad self opinionated, but can't we all. He more than makes up for that with his super generousity with Crunchie bars, and he is an angler, a very good one too!

[Guest sslatter]

Yes Peter, but is he an angler first? He certainly doesn't sound like one. He sounds like another of those country pursuits types who go fishing, and think it should be equated with all country "sports", the ones who want to drag angling down. You know, like trentbarbeler.. ??

[Peter Waller]

There is a clear threat Newt, no arguement on that one. But whilst we need an effective representative body I have sincere doubts about linking to an overtly pro killing with dogs association. There is, I guess, a hidden political agenda, and I doubt it will be in angling's long term best interests to link with the CA.