What Angling Times wrote...

[Bob Bradford]

Gozzer ,you are not living on "another planet" but you have not assimilated what has been written in Angling Times, Keith clearly states his views are not racially motivated, he is not discriminating about all of this mate, what he is saying and I agree with ,is the authority's must stop the removal of vital ,mature fish stocks from our natural waterways, END OF! there is no discrimination there whatsoever! NO-ONE should be allowed to remove prime breeding stock from our waterways ...NO-ONE!!! erm!!! how can I put it more simply?

[Bob Bradford]

[quote name='jeepster' date='Feb 22 2006, 08:37 AM' post='592268

 

and i like the line in the quote from arthur re bringing a prosecution for trespass, he's so well informed he doesn't even know you can't prosecute for trespass, as it's a civil offence.

 

 

I think you are somewhat muddled there Jeepster old bean, Keith knows to prosecute for trespass IS a civil matter, and KNOWS the authority's cannot bring some-one to court for that, that was his point!

[gozzer]

Gozzer ,you are not living on "another planet" but you have not assimilated what has been written in Angling Times, Keith clearly states his views are not racially motivated, he is not discriminating about all of this mate, what he is saying and I agree with ,is the authority's must stop the removal of vital ,mature fish stocks from our natural waterways, END OF! there is no discrimination there whatsoever! NO-ONE should be allowed to remove prime breeding stock from our waterways ...NO-ONE!!! erm!!! how can I put it more simply?

 

Bob, nowhere in my post do I say Mr Arthur is racially motivated. The article uses the words "foreign anglers taking fish for food" the thread is called "Replying to what Angling Times wrote" . In my post I ask where is it happening? You have not given me any FACTS to explain this. I have put forward my veiws on taking the odd fish to eat, I still say there is nothing wrong with it.

[Bob Bradford]

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.

 

How do Fact "encourage anglers to report these events? in what way do FACT communicate with the ordinary non affiliated angler? who elected the FACT members to sit and discuss angling matters on behalf of anglers? Why are FACT not more vocal to government and how has the need for FACT (if indeed there is a need) come about? I thought the NFA are our Governing body?

 

The whole point of this militant action has come about BECAUSE our Governing body's failure to deliver on behalf of anglers! don't you think we would all much rather be fishing, safe in the knowledge our governing body's are doing their job?

[Bob Bradford]

No Gozzer you are not saying Keith is racially motivated, but you ARE only focusing on a portion of the overall problem, that is what I am trying to point out, by denying EVERYONE the right to remove valuable natural breeding fish, do you see?

[Peter Waller]

FACT, Bob, is made up of a number of representative angling bodies, including the NFA.

 

Regretfully the NFA has long ceased to be our representative body, something that I have long regretted.

[gozzer]

No Gozzer you are not saying Keith is racially motivated, but you ARE only focusing on a portion of the overall problem, that is what I am trying to point out, by denying EVERYONE the right to remove valuable natural breeding fish, do you see?

 

Thank you for admitting putting words into my mouth.

 

As a person new to this problem I'll ask again for some FACTS as to where and how this is happening.

 

Regards John.

[Bob Bradford]

I know that Peter, my point is ,we should not need yet another committee! just how many committees does it take to run angling in this Country? jobs for the boys.

[Peter Waller]

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!

 

 

That it explains it all, Bob

[Bob Bradford]

Sorry Gozzer, I am having trouble seeing your point, You have already stated that you feel it is OK for some-one,any-one, to remove a mature fish for the pot from our Natural waters, you spoke as if you had witnessed such a thing yourself, we both know it goes on and indeed is perfectly legal....at present! what Keith is advocating and I endorse ,is to stop this practice, bring in laws to make it illegal for ANYONE to remove the vital breeding stock from natural waters without prior consent from the relevant authority's, I do hope that has cleared that up! now you may well feel differently, and that is fine! but remember this Gozzer, man is not the only drain on a diminishing resource, do we really need to catch and kill coarse fish nowadays for food? are there no supermarkets around your way?