Jump to content

Leon or anybody, byelaw interpretation, help please


stavey

Recommended Posts

Maybe if the bass campaign works and (as in America) more people go fishing, buying more magazines and enriching the advertisers as they sell even more tackle, and the editor gets a big pat on the back for increasing circulation, BASS may be given a partial refund! :)

 

I expect that Mel Russ believes that he has a business to run, not a charity.

 

(But then again there is a business case for investing to build the market).

 

Tight Lines - leon

 

ps I believe that the rate that SA charged for the adds was lower than that usually charged.

 

[ 28. September 2005, 07:46 AM: Message edited by: Leon Roskilly ]

RNLI Shoreline Member

Member of the Angling Trust

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Further to Leons response: this was a case where Elver fishermen were caught and prosecuted by the EA for netting under an M5 motorway bridge:

 

"The net he was using was oversized - 1.27 m long instead of the legal maximum of 1.25m - and was also being used in conjunction with a rope and stake. When a net is fished in this way it becomes what is known as a ‘fixed engine’ which is an offence under the Salmon and Freshwater Fisheries Act 1975."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We and our partners use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences, repeat visits and to show you personalised advertisements. By clicking “I Agree”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies. However, you may visit Cookie Settings to provide a controlled consent.