You most certainly don't Philip and I would have made that plain to the officer,along with the fact that he couldn't prosecute for not having one without my being actually fishing,after all its not quite the same as gun laws eh,that said i would have then shown him happily.
EA Licence Sales . . . . Down
- Thread starter Peter Jacobs
- Start date
I wonder what they would/could have done if you didn't have a licence ? You wasn't fishing was you, Just taking my gear for a walk officer ...
no-one in particular
Well-known member
We all have to pay the same money so it should only go towards fishing we can all use, free or day ticket public fishing where it exists or create some if possible, in turn that would increase license numbers; not cherry picked for a selected few by a non governmental organization looking to increase its own membership and subscriptions; that's not in the spirit of the way the licence fee should be spent.
I was never in favour of the angling trust getting this money, it was always going to be problematic, they get their own money through subscriptions voluntarily payed and that's fine, they can do what they want with that; if those voluntary payers don't like the way its spent they can leave and withdraw their membership and subscriptions or vote the board off or something, but the public have no such option with this money they get from licence fees. I don't care what way the argument cuts legal or not, if something don't look right it usually isn't.
I was never in favour of the angling trust getting this money, it was always going to be problematic, they get their own money through subscriptions voluntarily payed and that's fine, they can do what they want with that; if those voluntary payers don't like the way its spent they can leave and withdraw their membership and subscriptions or vote the board off or something, but the public have no such option with this money they get from licence fees. I don't care what way the argument cuts legal or not, if something don't look right it usually isn't.
Last edited:
no-one in particular
Well-known member
Is it the same for the angling trust, are they under the freedom of information act now they have control of public money?
no-one in particular
Well-known member
I wonder what licence numbers would look like if commercials had never existed?
Mark Wintle
Well-known member
If an EA bailiff or the police believe you have been fishing (within the preceding half hour) or are about to fish then they are entitled to check your license, otherwise if you saw either coming around a water you could quickly pack up and claim you weren't fishing. On one match many years ago we assembled in a car park near the river for the draw and the bailiff whose office was nearby came and checked our licenses even though we weren't fishing nor were we intending to fish the river but instead a pond 3 miles up the road. Several anglers hid and when we went to the pond the bailiff followed to try to find the missing anglers who continued to play hide and seek. In the old 1975 Act sections 35 & 36.
steve2
Well-known member
Some are upset that £30,000 was spent on a lake they don’t have access to. This is no different to EA spending money on any water anywhere in the country that they don’t have access to. So what should EA be spending licence payers money. Just waters near them I suppose?
This spend should be seen as helping an endangered species not helping a club make money.
By the way looking at the waters the Wimborne club members have access to £135/110 a year is in my eyes cheap when compared to what I pay for club membership and commercial fishery day tickets.
This spend should be seen as helping an endangered species not helping a club make money.
By the way looking at the waters the Wimborne club members have access to £135/110 a year is in my eyes cheap when compared to what I pay for club membership and commercial fishery day tickets.
thecrow
Well-known member
Perhaps some should be spent on finding out why fish stocks on some rivers are falling so rapidly instead of keep putting a sticking plaster over the problem by continual stocking of fish into rivers that have already failed to support its own fish population, but then I suspect that they already know and its cheaper to use the sticking plaster?
How about they spend some on stopping illegal paddlers that use waters with no PRN ruining anglers sport and some spawning redds, waters that anglers pay to fish?
Should they use some to check the illegal discharge from water treatment plants into river through "emergency" outlets only a tiny % of which are monitored?
Maybe using some to replant trees on riverbanks that they have cut down using our money to fund this vandalism?
Hers a novel idea, pay for more EA bailiffs to patrol waters, more income from licences and fines, more protection from poaching and out of season fishing, more eyes to spot pollution and illegal discharges instead of offloading their responsibilities onto the trust in exchange for giving our licence money to an organisation that represents a tiny % of anglers in this country? or they could keep doing what they do now?
Yes true, I had bought a day licence online and they just asked how much I paid for it
Sent from my TA-1020 using Tapatalk
David Gane
Well-known member
I've had my licence checked by the EA three times in the last three years, twice on The Broads and once on The Trent.
I was amazed at the "officialness" of the checks. The guys were wearing stab vests and were clearly equipped to deal with threatening and violent behaviour. The last time I was stopped (I was in a boat and so were the EA) the officer gave a running commentary "he has rods and a net and is clearly going equipped" and I'm pretty sure the incident was being filmed - not that I minded in the slightest as I was completely legal. Indeed, the guys were very pleasant once they had completed the checks. I saw them two or three more times over a three day period and they always hailed me with a wave and my first name.
As to the reasons for the decline in the number of licences, I suspect that all of the possible reasons that have been suggested come into play. However, although it's just a perception, I think that it's a fact that there are less people on the banks at the moment. One issue seems to be that on rivers there is less clearing of bankside vegetation going on. Just getting to the water at some of my favourite haunts is getting difficult.
I was amazed at the "officialness" of the checks. The guys were wearing stab vests and were clearly equipped to deal with threatening and violent behaviour. The last time I was stopped (I was in a boat and so were the EA) the officer gave a running commentary "he has rods and a net and is clearly going equipped" and I'm pretty sure the incident was being filmed - not that I minded in the slightest as I was completely legal. Indeed, the guys were very pleasant once they had completed the checks. I saw them two or three more times over a three day period and they always hailed me with a wave and my first name.
As to the reasons for the decline in the number of licences, I suspect that all of the possible reasons that have been suggested come into play. However, although it's just a perception, I think that it's a fact that there are less people on the banks at the moment. One issue seems to be that on rivers there is less clearing of bankside vegetation going on. Just getting to the water at some of my favourite haunts is getting difficult.
Last edited:
thecrow
Well-known member
They clearly have been watching to much rubbish TV.
Another Dave
Well-known member
Yes it all sounds a bit "suspect is armed, repeat suspect is armed".
no-one in particular
Well-known member
Sorry, I cannot buy that one, its so members can experience a bit of traditional fishing, if the concern was helping an endangered species wouldn't it be better not to fish for them; stick em somewhere were they can be left alone to thrive. And it includes - "These grants also covered improvements to other club waters including the provision of tool storage sheds, on site toilets, new swims and gravel pathways". Cant see how that is helping an endangered species and it must have come to a tidy sum. I don't see why I should pay for all of that as well.
The money should be spent on public facilities wherever they are.
Last edited:
I really cannot see what the gripe is regarding a club getting an improvement grant.
Any club can submit a request for a grant and providing their request meets the criteria , then they should be considered without favour, as long as monies are available.
The article clearly states that the funding was from both the EA and the Angling Trust and came from the Angling Improvement Fund.
Remember too that one of the criteria from the EA regarding the grants to the Trust are to improve angling facilities and to promote angling as a sport . . . . . .
Any club can submit a request for a grant and providing their request meets the criteria , then they should be considered without favour, as long as monies are available.
The article clearly states that the funding was from both the EA and the Angling Trust and came from the Angling Improvement Fund.
Remember too that one of the criteria from the EA regarding the grants to the Trust are to improve angling facilities and to promote angling as a sport . . . . . .
thecrow
Well-known member
They also have a statutory duty to maintain and improve all waters, pity they missed that one out.
thecrow
Well-known member
Endangered Crucians? they are classed as "of least concern" on the IUCN red list, there are 3 waters on my club book that contain Crucians and I know of at least 3 more in my area.
If the EA really want to help an endangered fish then they should stop issuing licences to trap eel's every year but hold on that would mean not getting the income from the netsmen wouldn't it?
Let me say it again; Any club can apply for an improvement grant.
The only restriction to any application being the availability if funds at the time of application.
The only restriction to any application being the availability if funds at the time of application.
steve2
Well-known member
You are lucky in my area most of the "Crucians " are not Crucians. Those that did have a good crucians have been over stocked with carp.
thecrow
Well-known member
They are fish that have been stocked by the club along with Tench, they are growing at a good rate and their future looks good.
thecrow
Well-known member
No one is saying that any club cannot apply for a grant but if the EA are failing in their statutory duty (which they are) and if asked their excuse would be lack of funding as it has been in the past when cuts have been made spending £30,000 on not just a water which might have been acceptable no it has been spent on toilets and other stuff that has nothing at all to do with their statuary duty.
Maybe if so much hadn't been spent on this one project other clubs would have been successful in their applications for smaller amounts.
Can I just ask if you are a member of this club?