EA Licence Sales . . . . Down

[Jeff Woodhouse]

Does anyone know where the licence money goes....officially or unofficially?

Officially - on valuable environmental works that will benefit fish. Unofficially - ipads, iphones, Golf TDIs, nice desks, smart comfy chairs.
I jest rolleyes, but a lot is spent on environmental projects. It's just that they do cost a lot of money, you don't get much for that £30,000 that was mentioned. I'm spending £18,000 on an eel pass, which looks like a length of strengthened guttering with brushes inside and about 10 metres in length. It's a private company that's installing it, but it was a £3,500 job when the EA first looked at it. That's how quickly costs escalate, but eels are worth it. Not that I like catching them. hno:
Didn't a report on the news suggest that a lot of Polish workers hadn't come over this year since the Brexit clause started? Perhaps that would account for a few already.

 

[O.C.F.Disorder]

ound:ound:ound:ound:ound:ound:ound:ound:ound:ound:

 

[markcw]

I think clubs should insist on seeing your licence before agreeing your membership. I’ve joined four clubs since I started fishing and not one has asked.

I ask to see club members EA licence as I check their club card when out bailiffing, It is in club rules
about both should be carried when fishing club waters. If EA card is shown they are told to leave the waters,the only exception is if they have purchase proof on their phone,

 

[103841]

That’s exactly what I do, I don’t always carry my wallet of membership cards and EA licence but I do have them all on my phone, maybe I’ll get asked to produce one day!

 

[no-one in particular]

Seeing as the water they have been moved to is over 160 miles from where I live and the club is £110 for a pensioner to join I would say that is £30,000 that has been spent on a very few anglers, not saying it isn't a good job done but I have to wonder why so much has been spent on so few.

Seeing as we all payed for it they should offer a free days fishing to all licence holders. I am not sure its right or legal, public taxes/licence monies are spent on private land/enterprises/clubs to benefit and profit a few private individuals. You wouldn't see road tax money going to someone to develop their privately owned road and if they charged other users a fee to use it, even less so; either way it would be unacceptable to all road tax payers.
I know a bird nut farmer who got a big grant to develop a bit of his land for birds but he didn't like people however; they insisted as part of the deal he included some bird hides and opened them to the public because they payed for it which he did; rightly so.
I don't see why exclusively owned fishing should be funded out of the public purse ditto licence money, its not right. Now I have contributed to this clubs/owners increased assets, do I own shares or anything?
This is what happens when you give public money to private organizations who can favour who or whatever they want because you have no rights over it anymore.

 

[thecrow]

If EA card is shown they are told to leave the waters,

Bloody hell Mark I don't think much of the EA but that's a bit harsh

 

[Peter Jacobs]

It is perfectly legal for any government department to provide grants for improving a club's facilities, regardless of it being a private institution.

 

[thecrow]

It is perfectly legal for any government department to provide grants for improving a club's facilities, regardless of it being a private institution.

Who mentioned legality ?

 

[Peter Jacobs]

Who mentioned legality ?

Mark did in post #45 above . . . . . . .

 

[thecrow]

My apologies, yes perfectly legal as was the spending of how many thousands on a floating duck house, legal imo doesn't mean its the right thing to have done.

 

[sam vimes]

I'm a good little law abider. However, when it comes to what the EA actually do for me as a coarse angler with the money they've had from me over the years, I'm not overly impressed. I don't for one moment believe that there's an equitable redistribution. I'm distinctly tired of seeing thousands of pounds worth of fish chucked at the odd select river, that may actually be beyond redemption, whilst totally ignoring others. It looks like a distinct case of good money being thrown after bad and I don't see why it's more deserving of attention. The fact that this can happen within a fairly tight geographical location only seems to make it seem even more inequitable. Not surprisingly, the EA will claim that one river is more critically in need than the other. However, their intransigence in accepting that the other river might have any problem at all is galling in the extreme. The fact that, despite their proximity, they are in different administrative areas, and these different areas seem to be subject to different policies, is also very annoying.

Though I wouldn't do it, I have some sympathy with those that might, on a point of principle, choose to fish without a rod licence. That sympathy doesn't extend any further though, should they be caught out, it's tough ****.

 

[Peter Jacobs]

Totally different situations Graham; on the one hand there exists the perfectly legal means to provide a grant, whereas on the other hand I think you will find that the expenses claimed for the duck house were (rightfully) made to be repaid . . . ..


There are a plethora of examples of perfectly legal provision of grants; think for instance about government grants to install insulation in a loft space or to replace a boiler . . . . or even an EU Regional Grant to private businesses and local councils for local area improvements.


Legality is a matter of judicial definition, whereas “right” is a matter of personal belief . . . .

 

[no-one in particular]

It is perfectly legal for any government department to provide grants for improving a club's facilities, regardless of it being a private institution.

Yes, but you know how it works, democratically elected, accountable government institutions. I have a say in how my money is spent. I don't have a say in how the angling trust is spending my money. It will all go to clubs that belong to the angling trust. The fact is there are thousands of anglers who don't belong to clubs or the angling trust who will get no benefit from that money, they pay the same as everyone else.
You could argue that loft installations had a benefit for all tax payers and the general public in emissions and fossil fuel burning and all that stuff, same as your other examples but, is there a benefit for all angling licence payers if a club has £30,000 quid spent on one of its pools, I don't get buggar all out of it same as thousands of others.
Don't get me wrong, I am not that bothered about it but if a thing is wrong , its wrong.
What happens if the owner decides to withdraw the fishing rights or sell it, he's done well out of our money, a worthless pool now worth £30.000. Will we get anything out of it!

 

[thecrow]

Totally different situations Graham; on the one hand there exists the perfectly legal means to provide a grant, whereas on the other hand I think you will find that the expenses claimed for the duck house were (rightfully) made to be repaid . . . ..

Iirc there were also lots that went by the board, the fact remains that £30,000 of licence payers money has been given to this club, a club that is not cheap to join and is far to south for even the anglers of the midlands to fish never mind the North.

 

[thecrow]

What happens if the owner decides to withdraw the fishing rights or sell it, he's done well out of our money, a worthless pool now worth £30.000. Will we get anything out of it!

A very good point, one I as a licence holder would like an answer to.

 

[Peter Jacobs]

Unless one is privy to the terms and conditions surrounding the grant and if there were any surviving obligations in regards to future sale etc then if remains a moot point.

Remember too the EA receive an annual budget from DEFRA so not all of their finances come from the license fees.

As a public body then you can always issue a FOI request if you wish.

 

[tigger]

The fact that might surprise some people is that almost every eastern European angler has one. It's the first thing they produce when our association bailiffs or I ask to see their permits.

It deffo surprises me....I bailiff a number of waters and a few odd EE's that do have an ea licence don't have a membership book for the water they're fishing!

 

[thecrow]

Remember too the EA receive an annual budget from DEFRA so not all of their finances come from the license fees.

Yes one that has been cut time and time again making it even more important that money is not spent on projects for the few.

 

[eric]

I've been checked once (last summer) by an EA bailiff - on a popular day ticket river fishery, and once by police on a Sunday afternoon when walking down the street with my gear

Sent from my TA-1020 using Tapatalk

 

[Philip]

I'm spending £18,000 on an eel pass, which looks like a length of strengthened guttering with brushes inside and about 10 metres in length. It's a private company that's installing it, but it was a £3,500 job when the EA first looked at it. That's how quickly costs escalate, but eels are worth it.

I'd offer to do it for 15k because thats exactly what they look like to me..a length of guttering with some brushes inside!!!

How can it cost so much. Surely there is some ripping off going on.

I've been checked once (last summer) by an EA bailiff - on a popular day ticket river fishery, and once by police on a Sunday afternoon when walking down the street with my gear

Do you need a rod license to carry fishing equipment ?