What Angling Times wrote...

[Dick Dastardly]

As well as having my doubts about the level of the supposed problem I also feel the nature of the protest is a bit suspect.After all we have spent ages on here banging on about buying licences,look at the way Tigger was roasted when he admited to not buying one (in his own form of protest) and above all the campaign the press has ran against licence dodgers! AND here we and AT are actually promoting not buying them! (albeit for a short period) talk about sending out confusing messages.

 

Out of interest I wonder if any of the more computer litterate here could set up one of those poll things to find out actually how many of us have or havnt seen (note seen not heard of or suspect or dreamt off) "immigrants" taking fish for the pot on a regular basis? Thyat might both put it in perspective and align our veiws a bit better.I would hate not to be supporting this if indeed it does happen full scale but just not in the areas I fish.

[gozzer]

As well as having my doubts about the level of the supposed problem I also feel the nature of the protest is a bit suspect.After all we have spent ages on here banging on about buying licences,look at the way Tigger was roasted when he admited to not buying one (in his own form of protest) and above all the campaign the press has ran against licence dodgers! AND here we and AT are actually promoting not buying them! (albeit for a short period) talk about sending out confusing messages.

 

Out of interest I wonder if any of the more computer litterate here could set up one of those poll things to find out actually how many of us have or havnt seen (note seen not heard of or suspect or dreamt off) "immigrants" taking fish for the pot on a regular basis? Thyat might both put it in perspective and align our veiws a bit better.I would hate not to be supporting this if indeed it does happen full scale but just not in the areas I fish.

 

BUDGIE, as you will have gathered from my posts,I am dubious of the scale of the problem. I think it's more a case of 'chinese whispers' ( wait for posts saying are they eating them as well), like stories of monster fish someone heard about, but you never actually meet the person who 'caught' it.

 

The reports I've read on here about three figure match weights being common on some canals, suggest to me that those waters are grossly over stocked.

 

During the late 60s early 70s there was a shortage of roach nation wide. This was very true in the Yorkshire Ouse system, so much so that I caught six roach in a club match on the Ouse, and at the weigh-in, anglers from the next match length came to see them, it was such a rare event! This shortage in one species, was soon made up by the increase in others, notably chub and bream. IMO, this happens in any natural water, not withstanding pollution. My main concern is the obsession with introducing carp into every water, regardless of the effect on the resident species. This can only be done at the expense of one or more of the species that are already there. Am I alone in this concern, that we are in danger of ruining the balance of a fishery, just to have 'bigger catches' and 'bigger fish' to report?

[jeepster]

do any of you watch Judge Judy? it is a real life American court with her presiding on real life cases, the camera's record all the drama, well she is damn good at her job and invariably (but not always in my opinion) uncovers the truth and her judgments are largely sound, well anyway, what Judy does is deal with the FACTS she will not listen to gossip,hearsay etc just good old fashioned FACTS, THIS WAY SHE IS ABLE TO REACH A VERDICT , I respectfully suggest some of you should adopt this line and use it in your debating skills, it makes life a hell of a lot easier!

 

 

i really really hope you're taking the **** here bob, judge judy is as real as middle earth or albert square.

it's a staged, scripted television program.

 

'judge' judy retired from the bar 10 years ago and has no legal jurisdiction whatsoever.

[Steve Coppolo]

i really really hope you're taking the **** here bob, judge judy is as real as middle earth or albert square.

it's a staged, scripted television program.

 

'judge' judy retired from the bar 10 years ago and has no legal jurisdiction whatsoever.

 

What, so Eastenders isn't real then?

[Bob Bradford]

i really really hope you're taking the **** here bob, judge judy is as real as middle earth or albert square.

it's a staged, scripted television program.

 

'judge' judy retired from the bar 10 years ago and has no legal jurisdiction whatsoever.

 

This taken from her website;

 

 

After her appearance on "60 Minutes," Judge Judith Sheindlin was approached about the possibility of presiding over real cases with real consequences in a television courtroom.

 

Intrigued by the notion of bringing her no-nonsense message to a national audience, she agreed. Shortly thereafter, JUDGE JUDY became a reality, premiering in national syndication on September 16, 1996.

 

Her way of dealing with issues is what is relevant, that was my point, regards Bob.

[Anderoo]

Out of interest I wonder if any of the more computer litterate here could set up one of those poll things to find out actually how many of us have or havnt seen (note seen not heard of or suspect or dreamt off) "immigrants" taking fish for the pot on a regular basis? Thyat might both put it in perspective and align our veiws a bit better.I would hate not to be supporting this if indeed it does happen full scale but just not in the areas I fish.

 

I second this idea. Let's see what the reality is.

 

PS Judge Judy

[jeepster]

This taken from her website;

After her appearance on "60 Minutes," Judge Judith Sheindlin was approached about the possibility of presiding over real cases with real consequences in a television courtroom.

 

Intrigued by the notion of bringing her no-nonsense message to a national audience, she agreed. Shortly thereafter, JUDGE JUDY became a reality, premiering in national syndication on September 16, 1996.

 

Her way of dealing with issues is what is relevant, that was my point, regards Bob.

 

the show is merely a staged courtroom reality show. the cases are real in as much as they are actual disputes between real people, however charges made and any verdicts reached are purely for the benefit of the cameras. the people involved do sign contracts stating they will abide by judys rulings, but these contracts would have difficulty standing up in a real court. the show is NOT a real court, and to me the fact you naively think it is says more about you than i ever could her way of dealing with issues is a pantomime, just stereotypical waspish american values, played out for a trailer trash audience, if that's something you find acceptable, or 'real' then i'll look at your posts ina different light in future

[Bob Bradford]

Somehow I very much doubt that Jeepster and once again you take (whatever twisted pleasure you can) from a having a snidey dig at someone , Instead of discussing the topic, well if that what floats your boat mate carry on! you will NEVER stop me from posting my views if I so choose to, it may have worked on many,many others , but your sort of cowardly intimidation only makes me more determined, so think on Laughing boy.

I note you have had zero input into this thread , no positive suggestions etc, what is your problem? don't answer that cos I ain't interested, nor am I interested in any sort of smart arse reply you may be thinking of posting ,just stay out of my space and I will do like-wise, understood?

[jeepster]

no snidey digs bob, just pointing out that i don't really value the views of a man who can't differentiate between pantomime and real life.

 

what exactly is it that you 'very much doubt'? if you're doubting the truth of what i say about judge judy, 2 minutes on google gives you all the information you need, well either 2 minutes on google or a modicum of common sense and a vague awareness of 20th century media ( i was going to say 21st but you probably haven't even noticed the onset of the 21st century yet )

 

i'm still a little bewildered by your accusations of me being cowardly, it's not the first time you've said it. i suppose i'll have to wait until next time you've got enough booze inside you to send me an abusive PM won't i. now there's cowardly

 

as for my views, they broadly echo the views posted by anyone on here with the vaguest bit of common sense

Edited February 24, 2006 by jeepster

[Dick Dastardly]

My main concern is the obsession with introducing carp into every water, regardless of the effect on the resident species. This can only be done at the expense of one or more of the species that are already there. Am I alone in this concern, that we are in danger of ruining the balance of a fishery, just to have 'bigger catches' and 'bigger fish' to report?

 

Slightly off the topic here Gozzer but I agree totally with what you are saying.

 

Come on the whizz kids give us a poll please!