about bloody time!

[laguna]

I knew about the use of 3 rods having just 1 licence, rather than needing 2 next year, but I didn't know until today that there are more changes happening next year.

I think this will please a lot of anglers.

The changes include a free rod licence for junior anglers which is hoped to encourage more young people to give fishing a go and secure the future of the sport.

Other moves include a rolling rod licence that lasts for 365 days from the day you buy it – rather than only running up until the end of March regardless of when it was bought.

There are flexible options to choose from too – another change is the ability to upgrade from a 1 or 8 day licence to a full licence with the price of the 1 or 8 day deducted. This is to encourage more people to keep fishing once they have tried it and make it cheaper for anglers who currently buy several short term licences.

The changes come into effect in March 2017 with new licences valid from 1 April.

Mark Lloyd, Chief Executive of the Angling Trust & Fish Legal, said:

"The Angling Trust lobbied the Environment Agency to make these changes to the rod licence system as many of the carp and specimen anglers we represent had complained about the need for them to buy 2 separate licences, for 4 rods, when they wanted to fish with 3, so the new extra rod licence option is very welcome indeed.

We also wanted a free junior licence as this removes a significant barrier to participation for young people considering taking up the sport. Well done to the Environment Agency for listening and taking anglers’ concerns on board."

Nb. Although juniors don't need a licence they still have to register with the EA to fish.

:w

 

[Peter Jacobs]

In general I think that the changes are quite reasonable and do address some of the inconsistencies that we have seen for many years regarding multiple licenses especially.

I would also applaud the free licences for junior anglers as anything done to help youngsters get out on the banks is a good move.

The old style 2 licences for 4 rods was rather inappropriate seeing as how very few venues (in the UK) allow more than 3 rods at any one time, so it really was seen as just a money-spinner for the EA.

Whether or not all other anglers should have to pay an extra 10% to subsides the projected "loss", well, that is altogether another question; personally though, I am happy to see these changes.

 

[Tee-Cee]

Generally speaking the changes outlined by laguna look pretty good on the face of it, and IMHO the extra licence cost for next year is still very reasonable. Personally, if I amortize the cost over the number of times I fish each year then it's a very good deal, although others may not see it that way....


The free licence for juniors is a step in the right direction, but having that free licence only works if the junior can get to a water to fish in the first place! I can only speak for myself on this but in all the time I spend on the bank I rarely see a junior fishing and that belonging to three clubs, although admittedly I'm not out EVERY day(!). Regardless of time of year or school holidays I can go for weeks without seeing a youngster out with a parent and many times it is just the odd visit rather than a regular outing. Even weekends seem to be a no-no as parents have other things to do, and that is completely understandable.

How to resolve this and get more youngsters out is something of a dilemma to which an answer is hard to see, but I hate seeing dedicated, small, pretty waters going to waste as is the case with one small club I belong to. Bang next door to a car park with nice clean swims and plenty of fish to go for, yet it remains devoid of juniors week in, week out.

Anyway my gripe over, I applaud the efforts made to get a better deal for anglers and remove some of the anomalies that have annoyed anglers for ages........

The change won't suit everyone, though..................................................and many will still make every effort to avoid paying - shame on you!

 

[thecrow]

I don't see the point of a free licence for juniors, there must be overheads involved in issuing them. Why not just have a minimum age when a licence is required and save money?

 

[Keith M]

The change won't suit everyone, though..................................................and many will still make every effort to avoid paying - shame on you!

And risking a £2,500 fine plus a criminal record.

All for the price of a take-away and a pint.

Keith

 

[rayner]

A three rod licence subsidy is all well and good, on the other hand there is no dispensation for single rod users.
Surely the angler who only uses one rod is paying for something they don't want or need.

 

[barbelboi]

Will there be any discount for pensioners that only fish weekdays between 10am-3pm a couple of times a week...................:wh

 

[Keith M]

The cost of a rod licence and club membership pales into insignificance against what it costs to watch a single live football match these days Lol.

Keith

 

[rayner]

The cost of a rod licence and club membership pales into insignificance against what it costs to watch a single live football match these days Lol.

Keith

It's also a costly affair for a round of golf but that's hardy the point. Other activities are not a concern for me

 

[greenie62]

I don't see the point of a free licence for juniors, there must be overheads involved in issuing them. Why not just have a minimum age when a licence is required and save money?

mg:I reckon that some bright spark has worked-out that it's cheaper to capture the data as early in an anglers life as possible in order to be able to 'follow' the angler's age/renewal dates and 'remind' them to get a licence when due! mg:

 

[fishplate42]

I welcome the new rules and think the cost increase is very reasonable, considering it has not changed for six years. I still think that £30 for a full two rod licence is reasonable, even if I am only using one rod most of the time.

Ralph.

 

[coooky]

I don't see the point of a free licence for juniors, there must be overheads involved in issuing them. Why not just have a minimum age when a licence is required and save money?

if its free for them then they dont need to issue a licence surley ? then no overheads are involved

 

[Peter Jacobs]

if its free for them then they dont need to issue a licence surley ? then no overheads are involved

While that is true, the statistics are important as an indication of how the sport is being taken up . . . . . . . as such then the miniscule cots are warranted I'd say.

 

[thecrow]

if its free for them then they dont need to issue a licence surley ? then no overheads are involved

Exactly..............

---------- Post added at 09:43 ---------- Previous post was at 09:38 ----------

While that is true, the statistics are important as an indication of how the sport is being taken up

You may not be surprised that I don't agree with that Peter Many of those that fish with a free licence will not go on to fish at an age where a licence is needed and so any data collected will be worthless.

Perhaps if the EA were spending their own money they would be a little more prudent with their spending but they are not its ours so do they care? I doubt it.

 

[greenie62]

.... Many of those that fish with a free licence will not go on to fish at an age where a licence is needed and so any data collected will be worthless.....

Not worthless! - it will be a list of those that haven't bought a licence and the perfect group to research to find out why they haven't! - rather than rely on opinions of others.

 

[thecrow]

Not worthless! - it will be a list of those that haven't bought a licence and the perfect group to research to find out why they haven't! - rather than rely on opinions of others.

Go on then I will bite how are they going to know who hasn't purchased a licence when a good number of them may carry on fishing having not purchased a licence?

 

[greenie62]

Go on then I will bite how are they going to know who hasn't purchased a licence when a good number of them may carry on fishing having not purchased a licence?

Because you'll have a list of all those who applied for 'free' licences together with their names, addresses, DoB and email addresses to 'remind'. mg:

 

[thecrow]

Because you'll have a list of all those who applied for 'free' licences together with their names, addresses, DoB and email addresses to 'remind'. mg:

Ah now that's different, so they will spend our money on issuing free licences and then spend even more of our money sending out reminders to anglers that if they have had a free licence will already know that if they intend to carry on fishing they need to buy a licence. Smacks of someone inventing a job for themselves to me.

Can I just ask, what will the EA do if they catch a junior fishing without a free licence, will they prosecute them for not having one or just issue them a free licence?

 

[greenie62]

... Smacks of someone inventing a job for themselves to me.

Can I just ask, what will the EA do if they catch a junior fishing without a free licence, will they prosecute them for not having one or just issue them a free licence?

If they were really intent on inventing jobs for themselves - probably both! mg:

 

[thecrow]

If they were really intent on inventing jobs for themselves - probably both! mg:

Oh I think the EA are very adept at inventing jobs and pretty good at being able to keep them even when it becomes obvious that they are not needed. Its just a shame that those at the sharp end of the EA helping angling are so often let down by those inventors.