What Angling Times wrote...

[Bob Bradford]

Bob you have had your questions anawered, but you still have not (avoided ?) answered mine

1)What about the removal of say dace or roach as bait ? An 8 or 9" roach could well be a mature/breeding stock fish. Would that be banned ?

 

2) Do predators count in terms of "removal" , ie netting out zander/pike ?

 

Next, a personal opinion based on what I have read and heard from Keith Arthur. He is the LAST person I want representing me or my sport. I am sure I am not the only 1 who thinks this. Could we not have an AN survey on this.Might well be interesting. Who should we have ? Bob James? John Wilson? Martin James ?

Lastly....the proposed non payment etc...just going to make the situation worse. The Ea needs every penny.This is from someone who doesn't have to buy 1, (live in Scotland) but would (and have done when in England). The campaign is a non starter.

 

Kried, Answer 1, has already been covered in Keith's comments posted on here by me thus; "This wouldn’t involve limited numbers of undersized fish for use as bait by the way, say six fish per day under 8ins/20cm."

 

Answer 2, has already been covered on here in Keith's comments posted on here by me, this time I have not bothered to find it, I will leave that to you ,then ,maybe you will read the whole article.

 

gozzer , My comments about being "entrenched and retarded " I am referring to most anglers outlook on this issue, not your or anyone else's IQ!

[gozzer]

gozzer , My comments about being "entrenched and retarded " I am referring to most anglers outlook on this issue, not your or anyone else's IQ!

 

Bob you're doing it again, I never mentioned IQ, in fact I rebuked someone else for doing so.

Edited February 23, 2006 by gozzer

[Peter M]

gozzer , My comments about being "entrenched and retarded " I am referring to most anglers outlook on this issue, not your or anyone else's IQ!

Bob you're doing it again, I never mentioned IQ, in fact I rebuked someone else for doing so.

 

Yes you did only a few posts back.

 

Overall this issue is about fish stealing and should not be confused with those who use fish for bait for predetor fishing. the two issues may be linked but essentially they need to be Separated as thinking on these issues needs to come up with different solutions which may need to have a consistency of approach so that they do not confuse matters later. I believe this is the sort of issue which FACT needs to agenda for discussion then come up with ideas that can be consulted upon by anglers as a whole. Over to you FACT.

 

The problem with the weekly mags is that they are trying to make the news rather than reporting on it. By all means they can have an editorial line but this must be transparent and above board. The manoeuvring of the AT in recent years quite frankly repulses me.

[trent.barbeler]

Dear All,

 

A boycott of buying a fishing license for two weeks will achieve nothing. Neither in the short or long term apart from damaging the EA fisheries work itself.

 

The answer to this problem lies in effective bailiffing. Both at club levels and at EA enforcement levels. Fishing clubs or a good percentage of them already have rules that cover this sort of thing and if their rules are broken then those clubs concerned have it within their power to expel rule breakers. Once expelled any re-offending by the same person or persons in the case of taking fish from the same venue which is against club rules then comes under the 1968 Theft Act which makes a second offence much more serious. That is the way to effectively deal with the problem at club level.

 

The EA is falling way short concerning its enforcement and as every angler knows we hardly see EA enforcement bailiffs out and about like we used to. In my opinion, the government should provide the extra funding so that EA enforcement can be effective and seen on the banks once more doing their job like they used to do.

 

When FACT came into being I was sceptical at first. Was this going to be another quango set up doomed to failure? Well, since its conception I've been delightfully surprised in regard to the organisation and what it has managed to achieve in the short period it’s been representing angling. If I had my way, I would definitely make sure that FACT representatives were paid for their slog because believe me, they are worth paying. As to how they could be paid is another matter and as Mike knows I've trod this stage until I've worn the boards thin. I personally have little problem finding out what FACT are doing but I take Bobs point about more information coming out of FACT would be no bad thing.

 

Perhaps individual membership in FACT might help to finance a website perhaps??? Well I had to get something in Mike!!!!

 

We need an effective EA enforcement department period. And I have full confidence in FACT to push this issue forward into the laps of government ministers as and when.

 

I would also urge NFA through its network of club memberships to once again call upon its clubs to look closely at getting their bailiffs trained "properly" to do the job they put their willing hands up to do "effectively". The IFM run excellent courses for bailiffing.

 

Under no circumstances would I consider joining KA or anyone else’s protest of a similar vein. It has no point long or short term, it is potentially damaging to EA fisheries work, and has grumbling racial undertones just waiting for angling's enemies to fly like balloons.

 

Cracking posts Mike Heylin in every regard.

 

Regards,

 

Lee.

Edited February 23, 2006 by trent.barbeler

[kreid]

Kried, Answer 1, has already been covered in Keith's comments posted on here by me thus; "This wouldn’t involve limited numbers of undersized fish for use as bait by the way, say six fish per day under 8ins/20cm."

 

Answer 2, has already been covered on here in Keith's comments posted on here by me, this time I have not bothered to find it, I will leave that to you ,then ,maybe you will read the whole article.

 

gozzer , My comments about being "entrenched and retarded " I am referring to most anglers outlook on this issue, not your or anyone else's IQ!

 

1) keith's comments posted by you were unclear, due to the words "undersized". 8"/9" ?? 10" eel ?

2)Sorry bob , this is now 4 pages long.

[mark barrett]

bob,

 

whilst i applaud the passion with which you are approaching this subject, i personally think you are quite deeluded in your thinking.

firstly a two week abstinance will do nothing to alleviate the problem of fish removal. as has been stated by many before me,. all it will hurt are tackle dealers, small clubs etc. furthermore a two weel abstinance will not put the extra millions of pounds into the EA coffers that is needed to produce an effective enforcement team. the enforcement side of the EA is so understaffed as to be laughable. in my area there are something like 8 enforcement officers, not all full time to cover an area including parts of norfolk, suffolk, cambs and lincs.

there just arent enough officers to go round. introducing new by laws will not solve this problem, fact. in fact the new by laws could be extremekly dodgy for any "non native species" anything on this list currently would have to be included in the new laws otherwise you are effectively creating an open season on those species, yet for all the combing of the proposals i have seen no mentionof this. the cynic in me thinks this is because the proposees know that the EA will not consider this and so are willing to turn a blind eye to this, after all it wont be barbel, carp or pike that are effected.

 

furthermore, i am not one of your apathetic bunch bob. i co ordinate the river watch scheme under the LOFAC/ NAFAC banner, and have done for the last two years ish. would you care to hazzard a guess bob at how many phone calls that i have had on the subject of fish removal, by immigrants? i weill tell you. 0, nada, zilch. this in an area where there is a PERCEPTION that its going on all the time. the fact is, that the only person reported for such in my time was a local.

 

inmy opinion the knee jerk reactions that are coming out either through Mr johnsons proposals or keiths are not neccessary, workable or enforceable. top state such on a debate forum, is not apathetic, retarded or any other adjective that you have used, its realistic. maybe you would care to come down from your ivory tower and join those of us that live in the real world.

 

just a thought.

[gozzer]

Yes you did only a few posts back.

 

No I didn't Peter.

 

It is impossible for any organisation to have bailiffs policing all of the UKs' waterways. Thats why your license, yearbook make all anglers bailiffs. The only people that are on the bank most days are anglers themselves, so it is up to us to police the water. Take photos, reg' numbers, anything to enable the people responsible for any illegal activity to be identified. Then report it to the fishery owner. Be prepared to make a statement and follow it up.

 

All I have heard about the emptying of our waters by person or persons unknown, has been sensationalist

conjecture or hearsay, though I have asked for proof, none has been offered.

 

The proposed boycott, will do nothing positive for angling, in any way.

[Steve Coppolo]

Whilst a two week delay in renewing your licence won't achieve anything in real terms, it will be enough to make someone sit up and take notice. There will be someone, somewhere that will wonder why the expected £23.5 million hasn't turned up on the 1st April. It will highlight a problem. That's what gives anglers a voice. That is the way that we can have our say.

 

Not wishing to get political, but remember what one black woman in America started by simply not giving up her seat on a bus? What you actually do as a protest isn't as important as the fact that you've made a protest.

 

To do nothing is to let everything carry on as before.

[sam-cox]

Where are you from Peter?

 

If all course angler didnt start for the first two weeks of the season and didnt purchase a lisence for that two weeks they could try giving bass & mullet fishing a go. That way any monies spent would still be going into the trade. But not to the E/A.

Light shore bassSng and mullet fishing can often be done with carp gear and float rods. so no lay out for new rods and reels, termanal tackle and bait would be all thats needed.

 

Aparently most of the barble have been eaten from the Coppermill stream in Waltham stow. Has anyone else heard about this?

[Peter M]

Where are you from Peter?

 

If all course angler didnt start for the first two weeks of the season and didnt purchase a lisence for that two weeks they could try giving bass & mullet fishing a go. That way any monies spent would still be going into the trade. But not to the E/A.

Light shore bassSng and mullet fishing can often be done with carp gear and float rods. so no lay out for new rods and reels, termanal tackle and bait would be all thats needed.

 

Aparently most of the barble have been eaten from the Coppermill stream in Waltham stow. Has anyone else heard about this?

Now theres a thought Bass and mullet, worth thinking about