Martin Salter on the Bob James Bust...

[FishingMagic]

This is a dedicated thread for discussing article: Martin Salter on the Bob James Bust...

 

[Paul Boote]

It is perhaps fortunate that someone - no names, no pack drill, never spoken with the man, though did smile and nod at him and chat with a then TV series companion once at a show - was fishing the Wye as it is now, a largely salmon-free river when set beside its fairly recent, several thousand every season, megabucks heyday, or he would rueing the day he fished it for shad / whatever.

"This isn't just a fine, it's Salmon Poaching Fine"

 

[itsfishingnotcatching]

Perhaps the ATr could campaign for an end to the close season then this would never be an issue in future. From past debates, it would appear a fair few "mere mortals" on this forum feel that the close season should be abolished and may have ignored it themselves so "happy to abide by it" seems a curious statement.

The law should apply to all, in this case the punishment (if you feel one is deserved) appears fair, how much is an angling article worth, again, previous threads suggest not a great deal of money, so why should Martin expect Bob James to serve a five year fishing ban? If anglers are already divided over the close season then the "pro" lobby will surely alienate those of us who have no strong opinions on the matter and furthermore could result in those opposed to a close season either not joining or withdrawing from the ATr.

"Should anglers lose their right to fish after breaking the law, as in motoring?" Discuss...

Drink driving claims lives, fishing on the wrong day of the year???????????

You get a smaller fine for speeding than Bob James got for fishing.......does Martin have a personal axe to grind?

 

[Paul Boote]

Salter probably feels, as a lot of ACA members did some years back when there was "trouble" - not renewing their Subs, some of them; Life Members disconnecting from the outfit etc - that a lot of collateral damage was done then to the ACA and to its successor.

 

[Fred Bonney]

Firstly, I wouldn't have thought that the Angling Trust would spend its money on a campaign that was shown in a recent EA survey not to be worth the effort.

Secondly, as far as the fine goes, I'm a bit concerned when people feel that certain "celebrities" should be treated differently to us mere mortals, but not that concerned when we see what certain "celebrities get away with compared to us mere mortals.

So yes, in my humble opinion if you live by the sport, you should suffer the consequences of damaging that sport

 

[itsfishingnotcatching]

Salter probably feels, as a lot of ACA members did some years back when there was "trouble" - not renewing their Subs, some of them; Life Members disconnecting from the outfit etc - that a lot of collateral damage was done then to the ACA and to its successor.

I'd have to read up on those events to fully understand (I'm not even sure what's been going on in the two and a half years I've been fishing!) but a long term grievance would explain the vitriol.

 

[Paul Boote]

No vitriol on my part, as I am a loner when it comes to Angling, not mixing with the Names and the Celebs etc. However, I heard what the real and all-important Great and The Good - the well-connected comfortably-orf people you need to have saying nice things about you for you or your organization to prosper - were saying several years ago.

 

[jack sprat]

The EA have imposed fishing bans in the past, usually one year, on habitual licence dodgers.

 

[martinsalter]

Guys. No vitriol on my part, although I did stand foursquare behind the ACA when they were being attacked and abused by Mr and Mrs James, so I can see why some might think that is the case. I just wondered if there was any merit in having a system whereby a fishing licence can be revoked or suspended, much like in motoring, for various categories of offence. Stealing fish, illegal fishing methods or fishing out of season are all offences where a tougher deterrent that a few hundred quid fine might be more appropriate.

Keen to hear what people think....even you Paul B ??

 

[Jeff Woodhouse]

Perhaps the ATr could campaign for an end to the close season then this would never be an issue in future.

I wouldn't want that and I am one of those who would favour abolition of the close season in favour of locally organised fences around the breeeding period, if required. It would split the Trust and I do want that when folks like Fred Bonney and me are trying to win more members, we'd be on opposite sides for a start.

Should he lose his licence?

I too think the fines are derisory, but perhaps in keeping with the general fines of having no licence. But then I can sometimes understand why anglers don't bother to buy one if they never get checked. Miss a few years, get caught and the fine is still probably less than the licences for those years.

Now if Mr James was to lose his licence, short of being snitched on, what really would stop him from continuing to fish elsewhere where no Enforcement Officer goes, not saying he would. So I don't think that would work, certainly for the common man, it's only perhaps because he is well known. For both of these cases to work (if a ban was implemented) we need more Enforcement Officers.

From my own point of view, so long as he stays well clear of the Angling Trust I don't really care for what he gets up to now. A case of "trick me once - your fault, trick me twice - my fault". Having said that I used to know him reasonably well (I thought) and liked him. All quite a shame really.

 

[sam vimes]

I've no real problem with the fine. It's in line with other punishments for the same "crime" so can only be deemed to be fair. Whether I agree with the closed season or not is immaterial, I abide by it and expect others to do the same. What I do find a little strange in this case is the confiscation of tackle. Strikes me as a little pointless in removing the tackle of an angler involved in the trade. Provided it's not rare, vintage or otherwise irreplaceable, It's akin to confiscating a professional footballers boots while only fining him the amount as someone on average earnings.

 

[mark barrett 2]

The fine was in line with what anyone else would have been fined so personally I think that its quite fair enough, especially as it was a first offence, or at least the first time that he was caught.

Just because Bob James has or had a certain standing within angling has nothing to do with it the law is supposed to treat everyone with a level hand, unless they are repeat recidivists.

Personally I find that less distasteful than being lectured on anything by a "two bit" ex politician who is only ever going to play at the court of public opinion and whose party whilst in office screwed this country so badly that many of us now struggle to afford another government tax, because thats what the rod licence is. After all how many other sports do you have to have a licence in to take part in? I think you will find the answer is none.

So "Mr" Salter personally I would rather see a ban on ex politicians preaching to us about a sport from which they are now earning a living off other peoples hard earned despite any particular talent within that sphere.

Perhaps you would be better off grand standing on the national media as to how you will be voting to ban angling in the same way as you did hunting with dogs should public opinion turn that way. Personally I wouldnt trust anything you said as far as the i could throw the paper it was written on.

 

[chub_on_the_block]

Revoking or suspending a licence for a year or more could make a far stronger deterrent than a small fine - especially if the guilty individual wanted to publicise his captures, to seek fame or notoriety for his catches in the press/blogosphere or forums. Otherwise, theres only the tiny chances of detection if a secretive angler ignored the ban, so the deterrent value would be slim.

 

[Poshpaul (Angling Trust and PaSC)]

Can we please avoid party political comment. (However strong you or I may feel for or against a party's politics and/or their members)

It's angling politics yes but it is not a party political issue.

 

[The bad one]

My view is yes suspension of your licence perhaps on sliding scale first serious (as this) offence 12 month, twice 24 months and so on.

To the policing of licences, We can't get away from the fact that enforcement officers are thin on the ground. Likely to get thinner as well!

So here all clubs can play their parts by writing into their rules

All Anglers must carry at all times there licence with them when fishing and produce it with their club card when asked by the clubs bailiffs. Failure to do so will mean the immediate suspension of your club card and an appearance through the disciplinary procedure of the club.

Failure to produce a valid licence for the period covered by the offence to the disciplinary panel will mean loss of membership of the club and a report to the EA for that offence.

So does it work? Well yes it works very well in my club, which isn't small, many thousands of members. To a man they dually produce their licence when asked for there card. I honestly can't remember ever having to ask a member to produce his licence seperatly of his card when checking membership.

If every club adopts this principle, it would go along way to eradicating licence dodging and likely to be picked up by others (commercials) in the same way. Leaving the EA enforcement officers that we have to target waters that are called "free water" and catch those fishing them unlicensed.

 

[geoffmaynard]

Personally I find that less distasteful than being lectured on anything by a "two bit" ex politician who is only ever going to play at the court of public opinion and whose party whilst in office screwed this country so badly that many of us now struggle to afford another government tax,

Whilst I'm sure many of us would agree with the feeling you express about politicians generally, I must tell you that I think in this particular case you are barking up the wrong tree. I met MS for the first time this year and viewed him - as one would - though narrowed eyes. After spending a day or so in his company and asking him some pretty barrow-boy questions, I came away with the opinion that this is a guy who you can trust, someone with ethics. I think he's worthy of a bit more respect than you display here.
I also met BJ for the first time this year and spent a couple of hours walking a river with him. Again, the man didn't strike me as being much different from all the other anglers I've met - he certainly don't have three sixes tattooed into the back of his head as some might have you believe.
I quite like the idea of a license removal for some offences. But who's going to enforce it? Nobody checks us anyway these days!

 

[tiinker]

He got what the law as it stands says he should have got and has not done his image any good at all into the bargain the EA officers did their job and the court did theirs at the end of the day it nice to know that the system works as it stands. As some people have said perhaps some changes to the law as it stands should be made for the different levels

 

[sam vimes]

Licence removal is all but pointless in so many instances. If you are fishing in the closed season, for all intents and purposes you have no licence at the time anyway. Those prepared to flout the closed season, are unlikely to bat an eyelid about simply fishing without a licence. Realistically, all that would happen is that the EA would reduce its own funding for a year or two.

 

[dangermouse]

I just wondered if there was any merit in having a system whereby a fishing licence can be revoked or suspended, much like in motoring, for various categories of offence. Stealing fish, illegal fishing methods or fishing out of season are all offences where a tougher deterrent that a few hundred quid fine might be more appropriate.

I doubt that most of the people caught using illegal methods or stealing fish would be license holders anyway so there would be no real deterrent. Make the fines a few thousand rather than a few hundred and maybe that will put a few more people off.

 

[sam vimes]

All Anglers must carry at all times there licence with them when fishing and produce it with their club card when asked by the clubs bailiffs. Failure to do so will mean the immediate suspension of your club card and an appearance through the disciplinary procedure of the club.

That's fine and dandy, for a club. However, as I wouldn't dream of fishing anywhere without the appropriate licence and club permits, I wouldn't join if a simple act of forgetfulness could land me in hot water. I certainly wouldn't attend any subsequent disciplinary hearing. What on earth would be the point? All that could happen is that my club ticket would be removed, as is their prerogative, and they'd look stupid when the EA found I had a perfectly valid licence.