Predator Angling Collective Fund

[Peter Waller]

Without wishing to put a dampener on this seemingly excellent idea, isn't this where the PAC comes in?

[Dick Dastardly]

Not my idea, Budgie, it was John's and others.

 

You can help by spreading the word!

 

Will certainly do that Dave,if nothing Ive got a big mouth!

 

At present any monies raised from my Pike teach ins are ear marked for Les's Angling Projects and Junior Coarse Angling UK. Ive been toying with the idea of putting on some "Tackle Workshop" weekends.More about these later but if they do get off the ground there would not only be a good advertising vehicle there but a source of funds to. Will contact you if I get anything solid.

 

Great stuff by both you and John.

 

Peter,as one of the PAC's greatest knockers I have to agree but in all fairness I think that the real problem here has always been one of insuficient funds.Due to the PAC not being every ones cup of tea I feel that a specific set up to address this very real problem would be able to draw on support from all pikings factions.

 

As Ive said before I think that indirectly this is a potential problem for all anglers.Its just that most wont accept this!

[Dave Lumb]

Due to the PAC not being every ones cup of tea I feel that a specific set up to address this very real problem would be able to draw on support from all pikings factions.

 

 

That's precisely the reason for it being organised this way. The issues at stake are not solely pike related. It can also draw in catfish, perch, zander and eel anglers to contribute to one big pot which can then be used to benefit all predator anglers.

[slodger]

I can relate in part to your viewpoint there Jeepster. I agree that the funds needed to reverse, or contest, such legislation, should a LB ban ever be set in motion at some point in the future, are probably beyond the capacity of the predator angler population. However what else should we do, simply stand by and let the authorities roll over us completely unopposed? Who knows what might be achieved if, for just this once, the angling community as a whole were to pull itself out of it's historical torpor and 'TRY' to do something? The really crucial point is that anglers outside of the predator group circles actually wake up and smell the coffee, before they're up to their necks in chicory!

 

A ban against live-baiting is not only an erosion of our rights as anglers, it's also the first and very significant nail in our collective coffin lid. Whether you choose to use the method, or agree with it on a moral basis, isn't the point, (If you disagree with it morally, IMO, as an angler, you are demonstrating a degree of hypocrisy, but that's another debate.) it is of fundamental importance to our very right to catch fish. My very real concern is that too many shortsighted anglers are going to be knocking a tune out on the Stradivarius while the flames are licking at their heels?

 

I'm afraid your point about education is lost on me? How will education serve to halt any proposed ban, once the wheels are already in motion? It would be like the leaders of Europe whipping over to Berlin in 1945 to do a flip chart presentation, showing Hitler and his hoardes why we felt their plans for world domination were really just a little bit too harsh on the rest of us.........

[jeepster]

my point about education simply meant that instead of trying to use a woefully inadequate legal fund, 'we' should be spending time and effort trying to counter the efforts of those who want to ban livebaiting by informing those who make the decisions of our opinions. you probably think it's a waste of time, but no more of a waste than p1ssing money against the wall.

who exactly would the legal case be against?

[slodger]

'who exactly would the legal case be against?'

 

I'm not exactly clear on that point myself. I'm guessing that any ban would be innitiated by the EA? rather than parliament.

 

Let's put our cards on the table here before the thread decends into a pointless debate between us two. I am absolutely certain in my own mind that a ban will come about. When? I'm not sure, but if pushed to guess I'd say sometime during the next decade. I'm also pretty certain, and this is the depressing part, that we will be unable to counter it, whatever our means. However, luckily I guess, not everybody shares my rather glum outlook. The blokes behind the 'Fighting Fund' believe that if we begin to prepare a fund now, we may have sufficient resources to mount an effective counter attack. Of course, and here's the rub, they haven't got a cat's chance in hell unless they can lift we fisherfolk from our apathy.

 

I'm not writing your idea off out of hand, but who do we lobby to persuade against a ban? At this point there is no proposed ban, or at least we aren't aware of it. I guess if we can project from where the legislation is likely to be proposed, or by who, we can, as you say, inform those people of our opinions. While we wait for some body to call for that ban though, doesn't it make sense to try and build ourselves a fund? To at least try and be prepared? You refer to it as an 'Inadequate fund', well it will be if every anglers perception is the same as yours won't it?

[Peter Waller]

I am really going to put my head on the block here and turn my name into the most hated in pike angling, if its not that already!

 

I know, and agree with all the arguements in favour of livebaiting. But I am beginning to wonder if, for the sake of P.R., we should not voluntarilly agree to a ban on livebaiting. I think that it's demise is inevitable and to fight it will not be in our best interests.

 

Such a fight would mean washing our dirty linen in public, could put us under a scrutiny that we could well do without. I rather fear the backlash that such a fight could produce. There are times, in life, when it pays to give in gracefully, I rather think that this is one of those times.

[slodger]

Rereading the initial post, it seems the Fund is also to be aimed at contesting any bait bans that are already in existence. I guess two of those would be, the ban on live-bait and coarse dead-baits in theLakes district, and the inevitable ban on live-bait that will be levied in Scotland in the very near future.

 

I'm still not sure who would need to be taken to task in order to reverse these bans. Perhaps Dave will expand on it for us when next he looks in?

[jeepster]

until a proposal for a ban is tabled, you're right, there's noone to lobby. if a ban was proposed by parliament then it doesn't matter how big your legal fund is, it won't do any good, what you need is the support of influential people. i have a feeling the same goes if the EA are behind it.

 

there's a fine line between apathy and pragmatism in this case, but i really can't summon up any enthusiasm to pledge money against an unknown enemy, for an as yet untabled bill. if you want to chris, and it makes you feel better, then fine. just don't accuse me of being apathetic if i don't. surely the fact i'm sitting here writing these posts when i could be doing something more productive suggests otherwise.

[slodger]

'I am really going to put my head on the block here and turn my name into the most hated in pike angling, if its not that already'

 

You're as entitled to your opinion as the next chap Peter. I honestly believe with my heart and soul that you are wrong on this though, and in a major way!

 

The implications of a ban on live-baiting are such that I believe they will shake the very foundations of angling!

 

 

 

Come on Jeepster! Play fair.

 

Unless you call yourself 'Angling' I haven't even come close to labelling you as 'Apathetic'!

 

Your points are obviously those of someone who cares, and for what it's worth they've made me think even harder about the likely effectiveness of the proposed fund.

 

You said earlier in the thread that you and I are both on the same side, let's keep it that way and agree to differ on this point?