illegal barbel

#1 (**permalink**) 23-01-2003, 16:33

after being told not to put barbel into his pond mr o'malley does just that .i have never wanted barbel to be put into still water and the punishment does not fit the crime.when will the e.a really put the blocks on this type of offence.

#2 (**permalink**) 23-01-2003, 17:06

So what happens to the barbel ? If they are allowed to remain, presumably Mr O'Malley will quickly recoup the cost of the fine and some

DAVE COOPER · #3 (**permalink**) 23-01-2003, 18:58

I would like to know the context of the fine. How much would the 100 barbel of cost him? And does the fine reflect in the cost, as in does it double the cost of the fish or just add a percentage point or two?

Also, who supplied him and why haven't they been fined? They must be guilty also.

#4 (**permalink**) 30-01-2003, 16:38

i like that coop

carl crathorne · #5 (**permalink**) 30-01-2003, 19:13

how many more people have done this already done this in other waters and got away with it but the way rivers are going it might be the only place too catch them soon then would we mind ?

#6 (**permalink**) 31-01-2003, 13:33

The answer is and always has been that Fisheries need a licence to operate payable to the EA.To trade you would need the licence, any breach of the rules ie illegal stocking, unlawful importation etc etc means a revoking of the licence. This way the O Malleys of the world cease trading the EA and everyone else save a fortune in court costs.

#7 (**permalink**) 31-01-2003, 14:35

if they hooked a big barbel near a fast severn ford they would't want to fish for them in a still water again ever.