The Angling Trust and the Rivers Close Season is it time for some answers?

[The bad one]

To The Bad One

Hahahahaha.....I have to say ...you are one hilarious fella Phil.....

At lunchtime today...... me and my workmates was creased reading that last post of yours...it was so "educational"....Especially the bit about "the balance of probability suggests they struggle to reproduce".....even though the Chesterfield Canal has had chub in there for at least 45 years to my knowledge ....with no restocking programme that I or any of my pals know of.......unless these chub live to be 60 years old that is...."struggling to reproduce" indeed.......absolute genius.

That statement really did have us on our knees with laughter......it was priceless buddy.

Hey, you're a funny man Phil.....a funny little man......

Anyway, keep it up matey ...you certainly make me laugh a lot.....

Maverick

So based on the one water you claim they breed in, Chub in stillwaters don't struggle to breed nationally? As apposed to near 40 I know of where they've died out. Heaven help use if you work in an industry where the balance of probability is used to keep people safe and you are doing the calculations mg:

Are you a giant? because you must be if you think 6 ft is a little Man.

 

[maverick 7]

So based on the one water you claim they breed in, Chub in stillwaters don't struggle to breed nationally? As apposed to near 40 I know of where they've died out. Heaven help use if you work in an industry where the balance of probability is used to keep people safe and you are doing the calculations mg:

Are you a giant? because you must be if you think 6 ft is a little Man.

Your argument seems to have lost an awful lot of it's substance....your responses appear laboured and shallow and if I was speaking to you face to face I reckon your words would be stuttered and your bottom lip would be quivering...it almost seems that you have run out of things to say....and that must be a first for you.

The Chesterfield Canal just happens to be down the road from me....5 minutes away to be more precise...tucked away in my little corner of the world. There is also another venue a few miles further on called Harlesthorpe Dam which has also held chub for as long as I can remember and I KNOW that place is never stocked.

I wonder how many more "Chesterfield Canals" and "Harlesthorpe Dams" there are in this country...quite a few I would suggest....unless of course, I am the luckiest bloke in the world to have the only two venues in existence where chub successfully breed right on my doorstep.

If I was you ...I would quit now, 'cos it sounds like your well documented (only by you of course) and constantly talked about (again, only by you) "knowledge of fish and all eco matters" may need a teensy weensy bit of a brush up ...don't you think?

Maverick

 

[no-one in particular]

Sorry but they are just that, do you or anyone else including the EA AND the trust know what the results of having no close season on rivers will be, do you or the trust have the evidence that the CS requires looking at?

ANY trial will take several years to conduct, you it seems are one angler that is willing to take a chance on what damage may be caused during these trials and remember the trials to have any meaning will need to be done others are not prepared to risk the already under pressure.
on all types of river covering all geographical locations, I and I know that
You seem to have got a little mixed up, you say the trust will take all views into account then you say they will seek a mandate from their members, make your mind up. You then go on to say that these "prominent anglers have a right to a voice, couldn't agree more it needs the trust to tell us who they are though and they aint doing that are they???


If you or the trust or the EA can show an angler such as myself the evidence that the CS needs looking at then why are you or they not doing that?? why are they conspicuous by their absence after starting the original debate??

I can answer that for you, because neither you or the trust have any EVIDENCE, if you or they have either put up or shut up.

I believe all legislation needs looking at from time to time. The world changes, knowledge changes. If legislation was not reviewed from time to time, we would still be living under the laws of the dark ages. The close season should be no exception. I don't require evidence before this process to take place.
Your getting mixed up, I did not say the AT will seek a mandate from their members, I said "that's just my personal preference."
There is already evidence that no close season on rivers for coarse fish will not affect the population. And I am going over all that again.
Don't tell me to put up or shut up, on one hand I don't mind when people start being rude to me as I it signifies they are losing the ability to make a argument by fair means, attacking the person, not the argument is a sign of desperation but, on the other hand, its still bloody rude. You have no mandate to dictate when someone should shut up or put up on this forum. Be civil, I have always been civil to you.

 

[thecrow]

I believe all legislation needs looking at from time to time. The world changes, knowledge changes. If legislation was not reviewed from time to time, we would still be living under the laws of the dark ages. The close season should be no exception. I don't require evidence before this process to take place.
Your getting mixed up, I did not say the AT will seek a mandate from their members, I said "that's just my personal preference."
There is already evidence that no close season on rivers for coarse fish will not affect the population. And I am going over all that again.
Don't tell me to put up or shut up, on one hand I don't mind when people start being rude to me as I it signifies they are losing the ability to make a argument by fair means, attacking the person, not the argument is a sign of desperation but, on the other hand, its still bloody rude. You have no mandate to dictate when someone should shut up or put up on this forum. Be civil, I have always been civil to you.

Then don't skirt round questions and put figures plucked from the air as evidence that the CS needs looking at. Show me the evidence that the trust said they would require before doing anything .

Why do you think the CS legislation needs looking at?

Why are the trust in discussions with the EA about the CS ?

Why did they start a debate on here and now will not give any feedback as to what they are doing with the EA?

Why have the trust gone completely against what they said the would do on their website?

Why wont they tell anyone who these prominent anglers they will consult are?

Where did they get the idea that the majority of anglers wanted the CS AND the licence fee discussing with the EA?

Why are you willing to risk damage being done to fisheries while any trials are being carried out?

Do you really think that the riverine environment is the same as stillwaters and canals and that any "evidence" from them can be transferred to rivers?

Why do you think when the CS was abolished for stillwaters and canals it was left in place for rivers, could it be because they are totally different?

Do you believe that anecdotal evidence should take precedent over the scientific evidence the trust said they would require before taking any answer?

---------- Post added at 12:34 ---------- Previous post was at 12:25 ----------

---------- Post added at 12:38 ---------- Previous post was at 12:34 ----------

The whole of this thread could be put to bed if the trust answered some of the questions that were raised by the OP as a follow on to the original debate that was started on here last year by a representative of the Angling Trust.

The trust are doing themselves no favours by not giving the answers or even an explanation why they wont/cant give any answers, there actions are possibly loosing them members as will their interfering with the CS without any evidence its needed.

As the trust claims to represent all anglers please show us all some respect and finally give us some answers because sitting back and hoping this will blow over wont work because there are anglers that wont allow it to.

 

[no-one in particular]

Then don't skirt round questions and put figures plucked from the air as evidence that the CS needs looking at. Show me the evidence that the trust said they would require before doing anything .

Why do you think the CS legislation needs looking at?

Why are the trust in discussions with the EA about the CS ?

Why did they start a debate on here and now will not give any feedback as to what they are doing with the EA?

Why have the trust gone completely against what they said the would do on their website?

Why wont they tell anyone who these prominent anglers they will consult are?

Where did they get the idea that the majority of anglers wanted the CS AND the licence fee discussing with the EA?

Why are you willing to risk damage being done to fisheries while any trials are being carried out?

Do you really think that the riverine environment is the same as stillwaters and canals and that any "evidence" from them can be transferred to rivers?

Why do you think when the CS was abolished for stillwaters and canals it was left in place for rivers, could it be because they are totally different?

Do you believe that anecdotal evidence should take precedent over the scientific evidence the trust said they would require before taking any answer?

I have already answered those questions, As you are just going to keep repeating the same questions over and over in reply to my answers with out discussing those answers. This debate with you has just become a pointless exercise. I like a good debate but this is just pointless and your use of intimidatory language makes it even less appealing. I cannot just keep repeating myself so, you will have to suffice with the answers I have already given.

 

[thecrow]

That's a no then you cant give any answers? lets hope that those that claim to represent us all will be a little more forthcoming.

Come on Angling Trust can you give us some answers please?

 

[Mr Cholmondeley-Corker (PaSC)]

I think it is fair to say - why should the angling trust answer you?

You are not a member. You do not support the AT. Therefore the AT are not answerable to you. Why should you be given special privilege beyond its members?

You may not be happy being kept in the dark. You may have many unanswered questions. But you don't have a given right to answers to them.

You are also hiding behind a forum name, so whoever may answer your questions doesn't know who to reply to.

 

[thecrow]

I think it is fair to say - why should the angling trust answer you?

You are not a member. You do not support the AT. Therefore the AT are not answerable to you. Why should you be given special privilege beyond its members?

You may not be happy being kept in the dark. You may have many unanswered questions. But you don't have a given right to answers to them.

You are also hiding behind a forum name, so whoever may answer your questions doesn't know who to reply to.

They should be answering those of us that took the time to enter into the debate started by them last year, opinions were sought from members and none members alike, at the moment neither of those groups are being kept informed of what the trust are doing but their actions may well affect us all.

No I am not a member but you are wrong that I do not support them, I do that through the club fees I pay.

Did the trust know everyone that got involved in the debate last year? they were quick enough to ask for opinions then forum names or not. No hiding on my part as there isn't on yours we both choose to use a forum name, I thought that you were big on having a choice.

 

[cg74]

So based on the one water you claim they breed in, Chub in stillwaters don't struggle to breed nationally? As apposed to near 40 I know of where they've died out. Heaven help use if you work in an industry where the balance of probability is used to keep people safe and you are doing the calculations mg:

Are you a giant? because you must be if you think 6 ft is a little Man.

Here's a few more examples of canals that have self-sustaining populations of chub; Oxford canal, Basingstoke canal and Grand Union canal.

---------- Post added at 12:18 ---------- Previous post was at 12:00 ----------

They should be answering those of us that took the time to enter into the debate started by them last year, opinions were sought from members and none members alike, at the moment neither of those groups are being kept informed of what the trust are doing but their actions may well affect us all.

No I am not a member but you are wrong that I do not support them, I do that through the club fees I pay.

Did the trust know everyone that got involved in the debate last year? they were quick enough to ask for opinions then forum names or not. No hiding on my part as there isn't on yours we both choose to use a forum name, I thought that you were big on having a choice.

Perhaps you should have asked the Trust to provide a timescale re their findings, before you got involved.

Out of interest, do you expect constant updates during ongoing government inquiries etc?

 

[Mr Cholmondeley-Corker (PaSC)]

They should be answering those of us that took the time to enter into the debate started by them last year, opinions were sought from members and none members alike, at the moment neither of those groups are being kept informed of what the trust are doing but their actions may well affect us all. No I am not a member but you are wrong that I do not support them, I do that through the club fees I pay. Did the trust know everyone that got involved in the debate last year? they were quick enough to ask for opinions then forum names or not. No hiding on my part as there isn't on yours we both choose to use a forum name, I thought that you were big on having a choice.

I'm not hiding. Mr Cholmondeley-Corker is my name (I added the PaSC bit)

---------- Post added at 12:21 ---------- Previous post was at 12:19 ----------

As your club is a member then perhaps ultimately, when they answers, the AT will update your club along with all the others that are members. As an individual you may or may not get a personal update.

Perhaps talk to them directly rather via a web forum.

 

[thecrow]

[quote=cg74;1329196]Perhaps you should have asked the Trust to provide a timescale re their findings, before you got involved.

Perhaps the trust should not have gone to the EA without the evidence that they said would be needed?

Out of interest, do you expect constant updates during ongoing government inquiries etc[/quote]

No I don't but I am thankful that the trust are not a government, my opinion of those is low enough already without it being dragged down further.

 

[Lord Paul of Sheffield]

Is the CS even important these days?
if you want to fish in the river CS there are plenty of stillwaters about, canals, ponds commercials that people can fish

 

[no-one in particular]

That's a no then you cant give any answers?

Wrong- I said "I have already answered those questions,"

 

[binka]

I had a really strange dream last night.

I was sat under the canopy of a tree beside a small stream on a hazy summer afternoon, the soothing burble of water gently flowing by and waiting for the tip to pull round when a wise old man with an oriental accent suddenly appeared from a puff of smoke.

He bowed to me with his hands pressed together and told me not to worry about all this close season business and that those calling for its retention would be vindicated following its scrapping and the consequent rapid decline in fish stocks over the coming years.

However…

There lay a silver lining in this mysterious man’s tale in that a scapegoat was needed for these bellowing holes in our riverine fish stocks and low and behold the spotlight once again fell upon the cormorant but this time, as a result, we ended up with some meaningful measures to reduce them.

As the years progressed the rivers recovered, the anglers fished all year round and nothing but pure facts were written on internet forums.



































Some of the above may not be entirely true

 

[no-one in particular]

That's a no then you cant give any answers?

Wrong- I said "I have already answered those questions,"

You know I understand your frustration, your not getting the answers you want, but if you ask questions on fishing magic you get fishing magic answers, and we cannot speak for the AT, I can only put my own slant on things same as everyone else, but I cannot answer for the AT. And its hard for me or anyone else to second guess what the AT are doing, we cannot provide you with the answers you want. Its not going to do any good railing at me or anyone else or just keep asking the same questions, the bottom line is no one can really answer them
Perhaps you should ask the angling trust directly.. Your questions are mainly directed at them so, they are the only people who can answer you properly and they could give you what you want. Waiting for them too reply on here, well maybe in time they will or maybe they wont, I have no idea but, in the meantime this would be your best recourse.

 

[Ray Wood 1]

I had a really strange dream last night.

I was sat under the canopy of a tree beside a small stream on a hazy summer afternoon, the soothing burble of water gently flowing by and waiting for the tip to pull round when a wise old man with an oriental accent suddenly appeared from a puff of smoke.

He bowed to me with his hands pressed together and told me not to worry about all this close season business and that those calling for its retention would be vindicated following its scrapping and the consequent rapid decline in fish stocks over the coming years.

However…

There lay a silver lining in this mysterious man’s tale in that a scapegoat was needed for these bellowing holes in our riverine fish stocks and low and behold the spotlight once again fell upon the cormorant but this time, as a result, we ended up with some meaningful measures to reduce them.

As the years progressed the rivers recovered, the anglers fished all year round and nothing but pure facts were written on internet forums.

Some of the above may not be entirely true

Ah Binka,
But we are not talking about dreams as good as they may sound, or strange old men with oriental accents are we. Dreams are just that dreams some are good some are bad but we always wake up from them (most of the time).

What we are talking about here is the lack of information from the Angling Trust regarding the rivers close season. It facilitated a debate on FM many took part in that debate. We are to presume that some how the AT found a way forward to enter into talks wit the EA. Was it due to the debate or other factors, it really does not matter the fact is the AT are having these talks/discussions.

We have no idea what these talks/discussion entail, are they to scrap the CS, change the dates of it to shorten it, keep the length of it the same but move it to start later?

You may wish to live in a world of dreams, that may very well be a better place to live rather than the real world we actually live in. I don't have the time to dream, but I do have the time to ask reasonable questions of the AT

As they involved FM members in the debate it is not unreasonable to ask these questions or to expect answers.

I have also asked these questions directly via email.

Regards
Ray

 

[binka]

Ah Binka,
But we are not talking about dreams as good as they may sound, or strange old men with oriental accents are we. Dreams are just that dreams some are good some are bad but we always wake up from them (most of the time).

What we are talking about here is the lack of information from the Angling Trust regarding the rivers close season. It facilitated a debate on FM many took part in that debate. We are to presume that some how the AT found a way forward to enter into talks wit the EA. Was it due to the debate or other factors, it really does not matter the fact is the AT are having these talks/discussions.

We have no idea what these talks/discussion entail, are they to scrap the CS, change the dates of it to shorten it, keep the length of it the same but move it to start later?

You may wish to live in a world of dreams, that may very well be a better place to live rather than the real world we actually live in. I don't have the time to dream, but I do have the time to ask reasonable questions of the AT

As they involved FM members in the debate it is not unreasonable to ask these questions or to expect answers.

I have also asked these questions directly via email.

Regards
Ray

Hi Ray,

Just an attempt at a bit of humour... Nothing more, nothing less and definitely nothing to take too literally

I understand your viewpoint and for my part until we know what these discussions between the ATr and EA involve we could all be getting excited over nothing if it's simply due diligence and information gathering prior to consulting more widely.

In any case I would expect there to be a scientific basis to accompany any proposal for change (either for or against) and how exactly are the ATr going to establish that without consulting those who are relevant?

Either way I'm not going to speculate and will await what we are eventually presented with in due course, I would rather that be on an informed basis with prior involvement from connected organisations as opposed to a discussion lacking the necessary facts and this entails organisations talking to each other.

Yes you and anybody else for that matter can ask away at the ATr until you are blue in the face but the fact is that they are under no obligation to respond until they themselves are ready and the fact that you were asked for your opinion in no way formed a contract that automatically entitled you to a reply on request.

I hope you do get your answers sooner rather than later but if not you will simply have to do like I and many others do and await their formal address on the issue.

 

[thecrow]

You know I understand your frustration, your not getting the answers you want, but if you ask questions on fishing magic you get fishing magic answers, and we cannot speak for the AT, I can only put my own slant on things same as everyone else, but I cannot answer for the AT. And its hard for me or anyone else to second guess what the AT are doing, we cannot provide you with the answers you want. Its not going to do any good railing at me or anyone else or just keep asking the same questions, the bottom line is no one can really answer them
Perhaps you should ask the angling trust directly.. Your questions are mainly directed at them so, they are the only people who can answer you properly and they could give you what you want. Waiting for them too reply on here, well maybe in time they will or maybe they wont, I have no idea but, in the meantime this would be your best recourse.

All of the questions asked have been asked of the trust, they choose not to inform those they claim to represent members or not, that's their choice. I know one thing though silence breeds suspicion and that's a fact.

Don't they realise that if they have answers/evidence that they might be the correct answers for most anglers to go along with what they are proposing (whatever that might be)

 

[cg74]

Perhaps you should have asked the Trust to provide a timescale re their findings, before you got involved.

Perhaps the trust should not have gone to the EA without the evidence that they said would be needed?

Out of interest, do you expect constant updates during ongoing government inquiries etc

No I don't but I am thankful that the trust are not a government, my opinion of those is low enough already without it being dragged down further.

I wrote:
"Perhaps you should have asked the Trust to provide a timescale re their findings, before you got involved"
You wrote:
"Perhaps the trust should not have gone to the EA without the evidence that they said would be needed?"

Can you explain how what I wrote and your response are even remotely connected??

Maybe the trust are trying to improve angling for anglers and as such it must be found out what the majority of anglers actually want; hence asking the vocal minority that frequent forums as a part of that process.

So you expect the ATr to provide progression updates of their investigations, yet not the same from government bodies......


... Strange!

 

[The bad one]

Your argument seems to have lost an awful lot of it's substance....your responses appear laboured and shallow and if I was speaking to you face to face I reckon your words would be stuttered and your bottom lip would be quivering...it almost seems that you have run out of things to say....and that must be a first for you.
Nether laboured or shallow just a short post to the Village one! Oh and I doubt that very much to your last sentence !!!! I’ve heard ducks fart before usually as they fly away!

The Chesterfield Canal just happens to be down the road from me....5 minutes away to be more precise...tucked away in my little corner of the world.

Would you like to tell me and those still reading this where the Chesterfield town section gets it water from to maintain its levels? And what the supply water is and the species of fish that swim in it?
Lots of Internet chatter on the Chesterfield town section as well regarding the chub and how they get in the canal from locals.

There is also another venue a few miles further on called Harlesthorpe Dam which has also held chub for as long as I can remember and I KNOW that place is never stocked.

Ah Harlesthorpe Dam or should that be dams? Commercial type water very good fishing it seems from the reports on it. Now one wonders whether like many other commies it had chub stocked at some point? Perhaps there’s more to this claim than meets the eye… We’ll see eh what Caroline has to say on the subject!

I wonder how many more "Chesterfield Canals" and "Harlesthorpe Dams" there are in this country...quite a few I would suggest....unless of course, I am the luckiest bloke in the world to have the only two venues in existence where chub successfully breed right on my doorstep.

You may well wonder, but the reality is they struggle to breed in stillwaters nationally. With exception of the dodgy two you've listed no one is backing you up are they?

If I was you ...I would quit now, 'cos it sounds like your well documented (only by you of course) and constantly talked about (again, only by you) "knowledge of fish and all eco matters" may need a teensy weensy bit of a brush up ...don't you think?

Why would I want to quite,your giving me hours of entertainment with you 1 or is 2 dodgy examples extrapolated out to a national level it's bloody Hilarious!

BTW there's enough on here who know me and what I do, plus clubs, syndicates and commercials up and down the NW and beyond that think otherwise and reaping the benefits of the sound advice given. Sadly they know if they stock chub they'll get around 20 years out of them and like the parrot in Monty Python's they'll be dead and they'll have to stock them again. Oh and if you want that advice I'll do you a special rate at £500 a day plus expenses and VAT.
Now remind me again who knows you on here and what you do, other than attempt to bullsh*t.


Maverick

Looking forward to you next informative post in reply as ever! XXXXX