What Angling Times wrote...

[badexcuseforanangler]

The only people I can see a boycott hurting are the tackle shop and fishery owners. Everyone buying a rod licence two weeks late isn't going to make a blind bit of notice to the goverment but the lost revenue in bait, tackle and ticket sales will hurt the other areas of the industry

[Peter Waller]

Back to Keith Arthur, personally I reckon that he is the best thing in Angling Times. Yes, he is a really excellent angler. Yes, he often, but not always, hits some nail, or an other, on the head.

 

But my feeling, for what it 's worth, is that he considers himself influential, but is he really? There are times when I wonder what planet he is on. One thing that he is is entertaining, and very entertaining at times. Great bloke, when you agree with him though. Bit of a London loud mouth when you don't.

[waterman1013]

FACT understands the frustrations of anglers who see fish being removed

illegally from UK fisheries. We encourage them to report the events, including

as many details as possible, to both the Environment Agency, using the EA

hotline number on their rod licences. The local police should also be informed

using 999, and a log number for the incident should be obtained in each case.

 

FACT believes that there is sufficient law, already available, to act against

those who are using illegal methods to remove fish and to protect fish in

controlled fisheries. The problem is knowledge and resource allocation by the

Agency and the police to catch and prosecute offenders. Any change in the

fishery law or bylaws will not change the availability of bailiffs or officers

on the bank or the outcomes.

 

However, we believe that there is also an issue of education. Many of the new

arrivals who catch and remove fish do not understand the British culture of

returning fish. FACT is addressing the education issue with the Environment

Agency through signage and leaflets, and with the Immigration Department via

specific information for new arrivals.

 

FACT has not discussed bag limits. FACT has always supported the legislative

process to date. The removal of fish from rivers is of great concern,

particularly when fish are under threat of predation from above the water as

well as from alien species within it.

 

FACT is opposed to any boycott of the rod licence or of fishing. A boycott may

prove popular with anglers but we doubt it will be effective in motivating

government to accelerate the introduction of a new fisheries bill, or to

persuade the Environment Agency to introduce new bylaws. The impact could have

adverse impacts on the industry, from manufacturers to fisheries, and threaten

jobs. Angling will simply damage itself and those who supply its needs, as

well as reducing the cash flow of the Agency on whom the nation’s fisheries

rely.

 

FACT believes that progress on these and other fisheries and angling issues will

be made through co-ordinated representations to the appropriate bodies.

 

The progress made on the cormorant issue was achieved in this way. FACT

believes that progress on the illegal removal of fish will be made as a

consequence of the representations and lobbying in which we are engaged with

the Environment Agency and Defra.

 

Angling leaders are sometimes accused, incorrectly, of “doing nothing”. FACT

will continue to take the lead in seeking a negotiated solution to this and

other problems.

[gozzer]

Have I been living on another planet?

 

Where have these 'immigrants' been taking these thousands of prime breeding fish from?

 

I live in an area where there is a large number of 'immigrants' and workers from many areas of the EU, and I have only ever seen the odd fish taken for the pot. If they are taking that many by rod and line, then I suggest that we sign them up for the england squad they must be bloody good. If they are netting them out then they are already breaking the law.

 

People taking fish for restocking, yes I have heard of that, but again not in the amounts stated. Transfering fish without a license is again illegal.

 

As for the two week boycott, it doesn't effect me, because I don't normally buy my license until may, because I try to stick to the old 'close season' (a personal thing).

 

I can't however see what the boycott is going to do apart from hit the tackle shops and fishery owners.

 

The comparison with the fuel protests is ridiculous, and hardly warrants a comment.

 

I have never met or listened to Mr Arthur, only read a few of his articles, none of which have made a big enough impression on me to stick, but I am puzzled as to what he hopes to acheive in this case, unless it's to take away the rights of any angler, who wants to take a fish to eat!

[medwaygreen]

Peter.

Why did you link London and loudmouth together are you implying that all Londoners are loudmouths?

[Peter Waller]

Oh dear, upset someone, not intended though.

 

I'm sure it is not unique to the Eastern Counties but most of us, Bob excluded (!) are fairly quiet in our manner, laid back even. Yer average Londoner does give the impression of being rather louder and less laid back. Culturel thing I suppose. 'Bl**dy loud mouth Londoner' is an oft heard comment, especially when some new incomer elects himself to the local parish council and then demands the whole village changes!

 

I'm not so sure that Keith Arthur could come from anywhere else but London. That is not to say that there are not millions of quiet, pleasent, decent London folk about. As I say, a culturel thing.

[medwaygreen]

NOW YOUR HAVING A GO AT INCOMERS FROM LONDON WHEN WILL THIS PERSECUTION END.

[Bob Bradford]

so thats's who you've stolen your debating style from then bob, i thought the personal abuse was your own idea

 

Ho Ho Ho, for the record when Keith is debating either on a public fishing forum or the media does not resort to "personal abuse" ,I mean honestly ,how long do any of you think he would keep his high profile job if that were true? as for me and personal abuse, well perhaps, but I prefer to think I am plain old fashioned blunt with people, if I feel they do not know what they are talking about , I use terms like "you don't know your arse from your elbow" to a grown man, if they are too much of a shrinking violet to withstand such a "savage onslaught" perhaps they shouldn't be allowed out on there own, I mean come on?

 

What I find interesting is the perennial issue that one seems to get on forums these days of failing to discuss the issues posted , but instead focusing on the individuals involved, this is a very strange way to debate! 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!

Edited February 22, 2006 by Bob Bradford

[Steve Coppolo]

I think Keith Arthur is about the most knowledgable, (about fishing), bloke in the country. You don't get to host radio and television programmes and write in fishing publications without knowing what you are talking about.

[Bob Bradford]

There are plenty of Know nothing loudmouths all over the Country Peter whatever gives you the impression East Anglia is devoid of them ? with the (debatable )exception of me.

 

ps , I was born in Hampshire!