OJ. Then calling it a day.

Please only post topics related to fishing the Thames Estuary in this forum only.
mentalextra
Member
Member
Posts: 38
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 12:00 am
Location: East London/Essex

Post by mentalextra » Mon Jan 17, 2011 8:53 pm

MickMull wrote:I reckon enforcing licenses is a non starter ( thank God in my opinion) I believe it states in the magna carta that we all have a right to catch fish for our dinner, which is why plenty of people don't buy bait digging licenses as it is a possible defence that this is part of the fish catching process :)
Well, a licence will open the door for all sorts of extra rubbish (edited by macer!!!!) legislation regarding when, where and how you can fish. Driven by self appointed, self righteous busy bodies, too busy fighting the unwinable fight. We are under the radar we should stay there. More legislation and paperwork is not what I want out of a hobby, it wont put fish in the sea mate. I started fishing back in the early 70s when I was a kid; back again in the 90s and started a year or so ago again. Every time its the same old rhetoric about fish stocks and licences. I would rather catch nothing (edited by macer!!!!!) and be free!

I will have to leave this forum alone for a while, I think I'm upsetting people. But, as regards licences, don't wish too hard it might come true!! :-S



macer
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 1536
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2008 12:00 am
Location: Romford

Post by macer » Tue Jan 18, 2011 7:51 am

Hi All,

Just a gentle reminder of the site rules.........

While debating and discussion is fine, we will not tolerate rudeness, insulting posts, swearing including abbreviated swear words, personal attacks or purposeless inflammatory posts. Our decision is final in these matters.

It's disappointing to have to say this but certain posts and even this thread is on the verge of being locked & or deleted should I see any further posts that are in breach of the site rules in relation to unnecessary swearing and what can be construed as inflammatory remarks.

I think this is a cracking thread and have enjoyed reading the comments by all however I would most respectfully ask that you think before you post

Cheers macer :D

joliroger

Post by joliroger » Tue Jan 18, 2011 9:07 am

I tend to agree with 'Mentalextras' slant i.e you won't have /add any clout or input to the situation via a licence and all it would do is complicate what is supposed to be a pleasure / pastime.............., if one feels so strong about it enter politics and do it that way (AS IF !!!!!), all that would be ceated is a 'Jobs-worth ' monster and another indirect taxation, like I've said by having a licence won't empower you at all, look at the Hunting situation (Fox) they are a group with alot more ability / money to manipulate their situation and Parliamentary friends to boot !!!!!!!!...........didn't help them to much did it???? , face it your life in any way shape or form is dictated to by Brussels........................., bit like leaving a Rat in charge of the Cheese factory !!!!!!!!!!!!.




JOLI

Iknowagoodplaice
Regular
Regular
Posts: 409
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 12:00 am
Location: Surrey

Post by Iknowagoodplaice » Tue Jan 18, 2011 9:53 am

Under the radar or head in the sand??

I'm always surprised how the prospect of paying for something which is not immediately tangible provokes fears about bureaucracy, paperwork and so on. I've paid for a freshwater licence for years and there is no bureaucracy to speak of and the benefits are real.

Unite for a voice is not rhetoric, it is realism. If you think commercial fishermen have no power, consider how they have had the power to destroy most of the fish stocks.

I don't believe for a moment any angler wishes to be "free" to the point of their sport being destroyed. That is not freedom.

We can if we wish continue to be apathetic and make spurious references to magna carta and freedom of the common man, but we risk having no fish left to catch, or the right to fish withdrawn in new conservation areas. If you don't want to attempt to defend and improve what you have, perhaps making a modest financial contribution towards that (whether via a licence or other means) then you had better hope someone else does it for you.

Remember, cod stocks are down by 80 - 90%. Complaining about the EU won't bring them back.

Note to macer:
Please don't lock or delete this thread if a member posts abuse. Delete that post instead. This topic is too important to be jeopardised by those who can only throw bile at it. At least it will get some of us thinking I hope.

flattiefanatic
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 2203
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2007 7:04 am

Post by flattiefanatic » Tue Jan 18, 2011 1:30 pm

Just a note about cod stocks. In the program Hugh's fish fight according to scientists cod stocks are improving (im just quoting what was said) and he is regarded as a expert :-O . Its a difficult area as we have no way of telling truely how many fish are out there as there is a vast expanse of water and cannot be mapped to how many fish is there. Fresh water lakes is a completely different scenario as stock is easily accountable and managed. Rivers can be electro netted but even some fish slip through. This is a great debate and may it continue. The for and against discussions are well presented. But i find it hard to justify paying a license for sea fishing. ;)

mentalextra
Member
Member
Posts: 38
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 12:00 am
Location: East London/Essex

Post by mentalextra » Tue Jan 18, 2011 2:10 pm

Iknowagoodplaice wrote:Under the radar or head in the sand??

I'm always surprised how the prospect of paying for something which is not immediately tangible provokes fears about bureaucracy, paperwork and so on. I've paid for a freshwater licence for years and there is no bureaucracy to speak of and the benefits are real.

Unite for a voice is not rhetoric, it is realism. If you think commercial fishermen have no power, consider how they have had the power to destroy most of the fish stocks.

I don't believe for a moment any angler wishes to be "free" to the point of their sport being destroyed. That is not freedom.

We can if we wish continue to be apathetic and make spurious references to magna carta and freedom of the common man, but we risk having no fish left to catch, or the right to fish withdrawn in new conservation areas. If you don't want to attempt to defend and improve what you have, perhaps making a modest financial contribution towards that (whether via a licence or other means) then you had better hope someone else does it for you.

Remember, cod stocks are down by 80 - 90%. Complaining about the EU won't bring them back.

Note to macer:
Please don't lock or delete this thread if a member posts abuse. Delete that post instead. This topic is too important to be jeopardised by those who can only throw bile at it. At least it will get some of us thinking I hope.
Meanwhile back in the real world. Ultimately youre not wrong, just not being realistic. If we are not careful we will end up going the same way as the fox hunting brigade and they have far more clout than we ever will. A few misguided people will kill this sport stone dead. We do not have a right to fish whether we "unite" or not. But any legislation will be used against us, really deep down nobody wants to throw there towel in with us. We are one of the "sport" bad boys. We kill things for fun! That is not popular any more. Like I said, keep under the radar (and we are definately on it); dont wish too hard it may come true!

You are confusing two issues. The commercial fishing industry and us the hobby anglers. We see the effect of the trawlers overfishing but that is not our fight, we need to stand back and let them get on with it. Our own issues as agnlers is to respect our environment and self legislate where minimum fish sizes are concerned. I am sure the commercial fisherman want us on their side, but when the stuff (edited by macer) hits the fan we will all be covered.

If this language is too strong then I am sorry, I have dumbed it down as much as possible. I am bored with theis argument now and will retire to my blissful ignorance, happy to spend time on a balmy summer evening in suffolk watching the local commercial fisherman chug up and down with there nets just offshore of my lines catching nothing apparently! :D

joliroger

Post by joliroger » Tue Jan 18, 2011 2:30 pm

Look at the end of the day it would be a boring old world if everyone agreed with each other about everything so......................the one thing we can agree on is to disagree !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Iknowagoodplaice
Regular
Regular
Posts: 409
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 12:00 am
Location: Surrey

Post by Iknowagoodplaice » Tue Jan 18, 2011 2:50 pm

flattie:
I believe cod stocks in the North Sea have improved a little (not nearly enough). Stocks are assessed by sampling and statistical inference, catch monitoring and probably other methods. It does not give an exact figure of course, but we do get a reasonable and reliable estimate. And there is the evidence of our own (lack of) catches.

Licences are not just about fish stocks. They're about pollution prevention and fishery management, amongst other things. These apply to the marine environment too.


mentalx

I'm certainly not confusing angling and trawling. Anything that damages angling is our fight surely. If we all stand back and wash our hands then we have to take what comes. As for being realistic, what is most likely to protect out sport? Doing nothing as you advocate, or collectively making the effort to save our fishing? Fox hunters are far fewer than anglers, and were up against widespread prejudices amonst politicians. But that legislation would have been enacted sooner if they'd done nothing; and they still hunt anyway.

Angling, despite some crackpots, is not in the same position. But whatever threats are ranged against us, keeping our heads down and hoping for the best will not dispel them.

I much prefer to go fishing than worry about all this sort of stuff, but it is more realistic to attempt to do something to solve our problems.

joliroger

Post by joliroger » Tue Jan 18, 2011 3:20 pm

Who are these 'Crackpots' that you refer to????????????

mentalextra
Member
Member
Posts: 38
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 12:00 am
Location: East London/Essex

Post by mentalextra » Tue Jan 18, 2011 5:08 pm

joliroger wrote:Who are these 'Crackpots' that you refer to????????????

..........and you thought I would, but I wont! lol :D :D ;;) ;;)

Iknowagoodplaice
Regular
Regular
Posts: 409
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 12:00 am
Location: Surrey

Post by Iknowagoodplaice » Tue Jan 18, 2011 7:22 pm

joliroger wrote:Who are these 'Crackpots' that you refer to????????????
joli
The misanthropes who think fishing and all sorts of other things are evil. Don't hear so much from them these days, happily.

actionsanta
Occasional
Occasional
Posts: 208
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2008 12:00 am
Location: Southend On Sea

Post by actionsanta » Wed Jan 19, 2011 1:31 pm

The last point I would like to make in all this is as follows:

There are a minority of so called anglers, that leave all sorts of rubbish and other stuff lying around on "our" beaches. This lets us ALL down. There are a few anti fishing campaigners, that use this as a favourite "they have to be stopped" line. I was lucky enough to be on the first Orford beach clean that this website helped to organise. You would not beleive the amount of rubbish we collected. 98% of it was angling related, the other 2% was shipping and cargo related. (there was a fridge!!) I remember reading a horse was washed up here once aswell!

Anyway back to the point. :D

This really gets on my nerves as much as it does yours, becasue we clean up after ourselves, dont we? Even if a license fee, was paid to the angling trust, they would help us fight this sort of anti angling campaign by showing that it is the minority that let the whole community down.

What about animial rights activists? What if they all decided to turn up at our next big "open" just to tell us how cruel we all are for hurting these poor fish? You and I know that we try to cause as less harm to the fish we hold so dearly, as possible. What if they chose to take the angling trust to court for Massive animal cruelty? I know this is a bit far fetched, but they would fight for the whole of the angling community, they would do this regardless of the fact that "Mr Blogs" does not think its fair, that he should pay for a license that gives him the right to fish whats his anyway!

Would you feel guilty if this really happend. (please go easy on me I know it's a bit far fetched, the princaple is sound)

Magna Carta: it's outdated and out moded! Yes we have a right to fish the sea, but as the forshore belongs to the crown, and the crown leases it to my local council. (My stretch of it anyway) They could stop me accessing the sea, just the same as they stop dog owners taking their pets onto the beach in the summer. Why do dog owners not quote Magna Carta?

Post Reply