Licence evaision

[Andy Young]

Darren, '...using more than 3 rods....' would indicate that you could tolerate three rods, and most venues, and regional bye-laws, reflect that three is the upper limit.

I understan that there are those whose fishing leads them to using just one rod, so their beef is that they have to purchase more than is necessary. It could be away of generating more income to force that extra rod entitlement, but is it posible that they may be less evaders if we could buy only one if that's all we wanted. and how many carpers fish three rods, but with only one rod licience?

Daren, I can see where your coming from, it seems that it's us anglers supporting the waterways, but a lot of 'well-meaning'(?) people want to abolish angling. Do the navigational parts of the waterways generate revenue from the end-user to the EA, ie, do barge owners contribute? this is not a rhetoric question, I'm not familiar with the boating fraternity, but wondered if it was just the anglers doing it all.

 

[Chris Bishop]

We all pay an annual licence fee but unlike the rod licence, it's regional.

?45-odd to use a boat on the Ouse catchment.

If we take it on the Welland, or down to the Broads, we have to get anoither licence as the one we've got only covers us for the Ouse, Cam, Wissey, lark etc.

 

[john conway]

Andy if you log onto the British Water Ways web site http://www.british-waterways.org/site/CraftInformation%5F1545.asp and look up fees etc you’ll find the boater pays considerably more than the angler.