Where has it gone?

[Leon Roskilly]

From: THE LABOUR PARTY

 

The Editor

The Daily Telegraph

1 Canada Square

Canary Wharf

London E14 5DT

 

 

April 14

SIR –

With the unjustified allegation from the Countryside Alliance yesterday (Countryside Alliance press release) that Labour has dropped its commitment not to place restrictions on the sports of angling and shooting , they once again expose the cynicism with which they try to exploit the sports of shooting and angling in furtherance of their own narrow objective. Labour ministers, including Richard Caborn, the Minister for Sport, myself and Ben Bradshaw at DEFRA, and Caroline Flint at the Home Office have all been involved in serious discussions with the British Association for Shooting and Conservation, BASC, and other leading representatives of shooting and fishing, to ensure that both sports are supported strongly and practically by the government. Those discussions have also ensured that animal welfare considerations have been fully taken into account by all concerned.

 

Support for both sports was made clear in our 2001 manifesto. That commitment not only stands but will be built upon in Labour's rural manifesto, using the basis of work done over the last four years.

 

BASC has already responded to the Countryside Alliance showing that they have got it wrong.

 

The Countryside Alliance has jumped the gun and shot itself in the foot.

 

Yours Sincerely

 

 

Alun Michael

Minister of State

Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

 

 

See also: http://www.anglers-net.co.uk/sacn/latest/i...ex.php?view=286

 

[ 14. April 2005, 07:17 PM: Message edited by: Leon Roskilly ]

[Guest Flybynight]

As I've ranted about politics elsewhere on this forum, thought I'd add in my two pennorths: I think shooting (which I don't do - but would like to) and fishing - which I do as much of as I can - are both great. They don't have to be particularly cruel either - or can be in the extreme. If you want to ban cruelty, then start on the mining companies that exploit poor bits of the world out of sight. Now - I've seen a few things there. But shooting and fishing? Keep them clean, and they are both great sports.

 

Cheers

 

FBN

 

PS By cruel, I mean inflicting significant and/or long term pain to a sentient creature by the way...

[Yakity - Yak - u.k.]

Sentient Creature........Lets leave Chesters out of this please

 

yy

[Ryan Lynch]

YY, all this talk about cruelty has me worried, will thrashing the water to a foam with one of snatchers lures be cruel? and who on, the poor little lure or Snatcher? seeing his poor little lures swished around on the end of a line by a big hairy angler, do you think he is up to that kind of shock?

 

LOL Ryan.

[kentangler]

Angling is not included in the Animal Protection Bill, so angling is safe. The reason of course is that you cannot ban angling on the grounds that it is cruel, and then allow trawlers to haul them up from the depths, gut them alive etc. and claim that trawling is not cruel. They had to leave fish of the APB, otherwise fish would vanish from the marketplace.

Another point I would like to make is many of you call angling a sport, it is not. It is a passtime, and an art.

 

[ 15. April 2005, 07:53 AM: Message edited by: kentangler ]

[Ryan Lynch]

Kentangler, sorry to take you to task but. Sport in my Cassell Concise Dictionary is 1. a game, a competitive pastime, esp. an athletic or outdoor pastime, such as hunting, fishing, football, racing, running ect. 2. such games or pastimes collectively.

 

So it would appear we are both right, it being a pastime and sport, angling however is as you say the art or practice of catching fish on rod and line.

 

As always regards Ryan.

[Pelyma]

Are you sure it's not an addiction??????????

[Guest Flybynight]

Sorry - you I think you might both be wrong. It's got to be a philosophy.

 

FBN

PS Or a religion...

[spasor]

Sorry to disagree with some folk. But, the passing of the hunting bill, has put a lot of outdoor pastimes on a slippery slope!

If you think the animal rights brigade is satisfied with the ban on hunting with dogs. Then I sugest you wake up and smell the coffee.

More support for the ban, came from political activists. More into a class war, than animal rights. Even some labour MP`s admitted, it was `One in the eye`, for the toffs.

Well, `Toffs` also go on pheasant shoots, stalk deer, fish for salmon etc. I`ll stake my life, it won`t be long before one of these becomes their next target. :mad:

[Guest Flybynight]

All of these sports are definitely targets already spasor - no question. We all see that: here's a quality quote from one of the animal rights boards:

 

'We learn of many cases each year in which anglers are involved in murder, drug dealing and violence to each other. One man killed his neighbour because his parked car prevented him from going fishing! Neil Acourt, one of the people accused of murdering Stephen Lawrence is an angler'

 

Have to hope that they try to get some more of this quality level of comment into the public view. It obviously makes them look as foolish as we all know them to be.

 

The 50% and more of the population who supported the hunting ban (50 to 90% depending on when and what was asked, I am told) did not all have a class axe to grind though. There was a LOT more to it than that, right or wrong.

 

So - yes fishing is a target - but so are lots of things for different extremist minority groups. Whether they can then manage the quantum leap of moving on to capture the imagination of the public and get a ban is a totally different question. And to my mind it is a categoric no in the current climate. Can't say what will happen in the future - but no chance now. Coffee smelt and poured down the drain I think. Just my view of course.

 

Cheers

 

FBN