What Angling Times wrote...

[slodger]

Probably not my place to butt in Bob, and I don't wish to antagonize you any further considering that you already appear to be spitting feathers, but speaking as a neutral observer, you do seem unable to take back what you're happy to dish out. You've labelled any of us that disagree with your opinions as 'retarded' or as people who don't care about angling. It's surely not that surprising that comments like those are going to draw return fire is it? Anyway, as you've said a few times already, none of the verbal banter is helping to rationally debate the topic in hand.

 

I'm still unsure of Keith's exact position with this. Is he advocating a complete ban on the right of anglers to take coarse fish out of a water for consumption? Or is he calling for more sensible limits on both size and numbers of fish that are taken?

 

If he is pursuing the first of those lines, then I for one would see that as being, not only a severe restriction of people's freedom to enjoy a small concession to their hunter gatherer instincts, but, as I outlined in an earlier post, also a huge and very real own goal against ourselves.

 

Angling is many things to many people. Where the whole shooting match falls down, IMO, is in the sports various disciplines ceaseless inability to co-exist in harmony with one another. Why should you, Keith or any number of other anglers expect legislation to conform only to your particular views? Because that's what a total ban on fishing for the pot would essentially amount to. Imagine how many specialists, or single species anglers, absolutely abhor the practise of match angling. Feeling against combining angling with gambling, i.e competitive fishing, runs at fever pitch amongst many other branches of angling. I'd imagine you'd undergo wholesale outrage, were anyone to lobby for a ban on match angling. Yet that's what you and Keith and the rest of his supporters appear to be asking for the authorities to instigate against another angler's means of pleasure. At least that's how it seems to me.

 

You've been asked several times on this thread to give some examples of the threat posed to our fish stocks by immigrant anglers, yet, so far, neither you nor anyone else appears able to offer one outright example of this happening. I happen to know it happens to a degree, I actually have witnessed migrant farm workers of mainly Eastern European descent, who are based at a Cambs vegetable packing plant, fishing for the pot. I've only ever seen them taking the odd jack or zander away, but in all honesty I have little doubt that they would fail to discriminate between a sub 10lb pike or a double figure one. I find that both sad and frustrating, but have to confess to having a degree of emmpathy with them.

 

These people, it must be remembered, come from countries were it is absolutely the norm to fish solely for the pot. In fact, as far as pike, perch and zander are concerned, that is very nearly the case the world over. It's we British, with our almost exclusive catch-and-release angling policies, that are the exception. Little wonder then that these anglers have very real difficulties in understanding the outrage of British anglers to their pot hunting style of angling. I've got to confess, much as I love to fish, and even though I'd personally rather eat cardboard than coarse fish, I can quite readily see myself how many people might percieve fishing for the pot as a much purer, and morally sounder premise under which to fish.

 

Of course we can choose to shop for our eating fish in Tecos et al, but it isn't difficult to see the satisfaction that might be gleaned by an angler catching his own supper fresh from the river. You questioned whether some of us saw ourselves as conservationists earlier in the thread. Presumably, by asking the question, you were inferring that the taking of fish for food is not a conservationally sound thing to do? I can not agree with that view either. All of the various shooting bodies would rightly lay claim to the title of 'conservationists' yet you would be hard pressed to imagine anyone practising 'shoot-and-release'. THe very fact that they, and we, wish to preserve our sport makes us all conservationists.

 

As a final point, I would like to add, that while I disagree with most of your views on this issue, I do salute the hearfelt passion you have for your beliefs. Such strength of conviction can only be for the good of angling ultimately, so hats off to you for that.

Edited February 24, 2006 by slodger

[Bob Bradford]

Great post in my opinion Slodger!

 

No ,Keith is not saying he would like a total ban on fish being removed , if you read his comments I posted on behalf of Angling Times on the first page of this he covers live/dead-baiting, I do take your point about it setting a dangerous precedent and it in some way weakening anglers position, ie, to catch fish to eat makes sense , and can be defended somewhat, whereas to just catch fish for pleasure ,return them and catch them again could be argued as cruel and unnecessary, I do see this argument really I do, but (there is always a but!) I would argue for a total ban, it would make the policing of any venue so much easier, anyone caught taking mature fish (notice I did not state immigrants but anyone) would be nicked! and my defence against the argument of catch and release being cruel is, if our Natural fish stocks keep disappearing through so many different ways ( and taking fish for the pot is only one of them) there will be no fish left for the Natural predators to feed on, how cruel is that? I see taking mature breeding stock for the table as vandalism and unnecessary, of course it could be argued so is catch and release ! and so we go on round and round! so the question is ; is it best to leave well alone and change nothing ? or change things for the (hopefully ) better?

 

My personal view here; I have long believed that angling with rod and line is indefensible, and I think if most anglers are honest they will reach the same conclusion, but (theres that but again!) there are a lot worse things I could be doing and when we have World peace,no starvation , murders etc then maybe we can look at angling and ban it, until that day, I will continue to fish if I so choose , and I will continue to voice my comments, of course I have always known that many of my comments on here do not go down well, but that is my style of debating, just because I post something does not mean I believe it! Devils advocate if you like, I have been a regular contributer on Total Fishing for about 3 years and the regulars know me and my style, what is wrong with poking the fire to see how it reacts? that is called debating, sadly there are always a few that get personal and want a piece of me, well I am always willing to put my money where my mouth is and meet them in the flesh, some accept ,most decline, but all of the ones that have accepted get to see the real me ( and no-one has took a swing at me to date!) I have many contacts and friends up and down the Country through at first Match angling and then lately the angling forums, I make no excuse for my style of stirring it up a bit as it can be productive, if it gets traditionally apathetic anglers talking and reacting ..job done!, regards Bob. ps .slodger I think you have me sussed.

[Bob Bradford]

By the way for those of you that may be interested, Matt Hayes ( a non match angler) and all rounder is going on Keith Arthur's radio show "Fishermen's Blues" on Sunday about 7.25am, according to Keith ,Matt has some even MORE radical views to air than Keith! should be good!

[Elton]

By the way for those of you that may be interested, Matt Hayes ( a non match angler) and all rounder is going on Keith Arthur's radio show "Fishermen's Blues" on Sunday about 7.25am, according to Keith ,Matt has some even MORE radical views to air than Keith! should be good!

 

Is there a way of listening to that online, do you know? I wouldn't mind hearing that, but will probably be in the land of nod after a long day tomorrow.

[Steve Coppolo]

I must say that this thread has been a real eye opener for me. I hadn't dreamed that anyone would want to take course fish home to eat. I have been away from course angling for many years. I turned to sea angling when our rivers were being badly polluted and over grown with weed caused by farmers furtilizers. Being able to take a few fish home for the table was one of the attractions of sea angling. Proper eating fish like Cod, Skate, Bass, Plaicce, etc. From what I've seen and heard, the effort it takes to make course fish remotely edible is hardly worth the hassle.

 

I have returned to course angling recently for two reasons. First and foremost, winter sea angling in my part of the country has become a waste of time. The Cod that we used to catch are no longer there. Draw your own conclusions as to why that might be. Second, I believe that the introduction of a licence and the good work done by the EA has improved course angling since I gave it up years ago. The rivers are in great condition and fish are thriving.

 

Without wishing to swing the lamp, when I used to go course fishing regularly, people taking course fish home to eat was almost unheard of. It wasn't the done thing. I heard one or two people say that Grayling and Perch were good eating fish, but they were only repeating what they had heard from a friend of a friend. No one I ever knew or fished with ever took a course fish home to eat, with the exception of Eels, (which used to plague the rivers in the summer), maybe.

 

The first time I saw course fish for sale on a slab was in Green Street, Forest Gate, East London. The area had a very high population of immigrants and you could find all sorts for sale on their fish slabs. Roach, Chub, Carp, Pike, etc. I was disgusted. Although I haven't seen it first hand, I've had more than a few people telling me how Eastern Europeans have been dragging, (nets), ponds and lakes in Londons parks. Victoria park lake in Hackney is one that has cropped up more than once. As has been mentioned, different people have different cultures, but if you want to see what effect this sort of behaviour has on a water, go to Poland. In Poland it is considered normal to catch course fish for the table. As a result most of their waters are almost bereft of fish. Is that what we want to see happen on our waters, regardless of who it is taking the fish?

 

I'd hate to have to go back to sea angling in the winter due to lack of course fish!

Edited February 24, 2006 by Steve Coppolo

[GlennB]

The first time I saw coarse fish for sale on a slab was in Green Street, Forest Gate, East London.

 

You need to get out more. The first time I saw it was by The Elephant and Castle, circa 1957. Probably saw it well before that but I was too young to remember. Eels it was. Jellied, and lovely with a bit of vinegar and brown pepper. Also "live eels" at a street market down Walworth Road way - not so attractive for a youngster

 

The area had a very high population of immigrants ....

So did South London where I lived, but I'm pretty sure it was the "native" Sarf Larndeners, not the "immigrants", selling the eels.

 

These days, down in the SW of England where I now live, it's still the native Brits netting elvers for the restaurant trade that might well be knackering the local eel population. But I dunno if that would hold up to scientific analysis any more than your racist tripe, Steve, so don't quote me. Did not one of those "witnesses" you mention (to the illegal netting) own a phone-cam to collect evidence???? Did anybody go to the police or phone the EA???

Are you aware that carp+perch are available in British supermarkets/restaurants, stocked from perfectly legal continental sources such as Scandinavia?????

 

tight lines

[gozzer]

I cannot understand this "disgust" about taking coarse fish for the table. They are not "proper eating fish like cod, bass, skate and plaice", I take 3or4 fish a season, the only ones I find worth eating , are, grayling(taste like trout but better), perch( like sea bass), pike( best about 4-5lbs, any smaller too many bones, any bigger too big), eels (when we had some, I'm not keen, but a pesioner I know loves them) and carp( I have not tried them yet, but have a few recipes), no one I know takes specimen sized fish.

 

All I have heard on this thread is, "someone told me that someone said that someone was netting a water",well, why didn't that someone who saw it do something? Netting is illegal and is hardly an inconspicuous pastime.

If an angler is seen using legal methods and taking more than the limit, then do something. All the people I know who take edible fish, do so like me, ie maybe up to half a dozen a season. This is not going to cause the demise of the coarse fish population. There are far more things going into our waters that more likely to do that.

 

To take away the right to take a couple of fish for the table, will IMO, start us down on a very slippery road, and who know where it will end.

[jeepster]

there's never any real evidence of 'immigrants' taking masses of fish, i'm sure it does happen, but not to the level people make out. let's not forget one of the most high profile cases of people taking coarse fish to sell on recently, wasn't he a good anglo saxon match fisherman?

[Steve Coppolo]

You need to get out more. The first time I saw it was by The Elephant and Castle, circa 1957. Probably saw it well before that but I was too young to remember. Eels it was. Jellied, and lovely with a bit of vinegar and brown pepper. Also "live eels" at a street market down Walworth Road way - not so attractive for a youngster

 

I suggest it's you who needs to get out more. Jellied and stewed Eels have been eaten in London for as long as I, or my Father for that matter, can remember. Most of the Eels were caught commercially in Eel traps by licenced Eel catchers, not caught by anglers. I did say that Eels were the only fish that I ever saw anyone take for food. As they are migratory, I don't class them as a true course fish anyway and as I mentioned, they used to plague the rivers in the summer. I don't ever remember the rivers being overrun with Roach or Chub.

 

But I dunno if that would hold up to scientific analysis any more than your racist tripe, Steve, so don't quote me.

 

Oh dear. Here we go again. No one in this country is allowed to say anything against any immigrant because that automatically makes them a racist. How daft of me to forget that sad fact. Grow up for f*** sake, do.

 

Did not one of those "witnesses" you mention (to the illegal netting) own a phone-cam to collect evidence???? Did anybody go to the police or phone the EA???

 

As it happens, the people who have told me about these practices are local people who are not anglers. They just live there and see it happening. I don't suppose for a second they'd know who to contact but a few did say they'd called the police but they didn't do anything. By the way, were you aware that there was also a problem wirt immigrants taking Swans to eat?

 

 

Are you aware that carp+perch are available in British supermarkets/restaurants, stocked from perfectly legal continental sources such as Scandinavia?????

 

No, I wasn't aware. But as I haven't seen it with my own eyes, it doesn't happen. O.K?

[kreid]

Fish from tesco's (or any other S- market)...NOT a ggod option.Scottish salmon ? They are kept immune to disease with chemicals pumped into the water. The sea trout/salmon fishery in the west coast has been decimated....especially where there's a farm....coincidence ? See Fly Fishinf and Fly Tying mag. And escapes...cross breeding has probably now taken place, Rainbows escape en masse and eat the indigious species out of house and habitat. I wouldn't touch a farmed salmon with a barge pole.

 

Sea fish....the seas are already depleted. As for tropical species, it just can't be environmentally ok to fly fish out from wherever to the UK, meantime taking more fish out of the seas there than previously was taken. its madness.