Why?

I've been reading some very interesting debates on this forum about "What qualifies as disabled" and "Licence Dodgers" and its on this last subject I would like to know why we, as Anglers, have to pay for a licence to fish inland. Fishing is probably the only amateur sport in this Country where those participating have to purchase a licence. There is understandably a need for authorities to know who wishes to hold shotguns or other firearms, and probably, on health and safety grounds, there is a need to monitor those wishing to participate in the sport of boxing, which are the only two other sports I can think of where some form of licence is required. I cannot see any need in relation fishing.

You don't need a licence to fish in Scotland, you don't need one for coarse fishing in southern Ireland, so why do we need on in England?

I believe I am right in saying that the fishing fraternity generates a considerable income for a good number of people, all of whom pay taxes in the usual way. Most of us that work, pay taxes. Do we know what Envage do with our licence fees, co's as far as I can see, they've done bugger all around where I live to improve fishing. Fishery owners, on the contrary, have spent thousands creating and stocking waters, without Envage help at all.

So why do we have to buy a bloody licence?

Colin, your questions demand a lot of answers and I can't give them all even if I had all the facts for your area. Forget the comparisons with shotguns and tax. Yes the fees do raise a lot of revenue for the EA and it is ALL spent on fishing, but to find out 'where' you will have to get involved at a much closer level.

You're a member of a club, get on the committee and find out who are your contacts at the EA in your area. Then find out how your club is represented to the EA by either a RUG (River Users Group) or a fisheries consultative or perhaps NAFAC. Get to know, if you can, the individuals who work in your region's fiseries department and talk to them about your problems.

On the one hand you complain that they aren't doing anything as far as you are concerned and when I meet with our EA people they are desperate to find out what it is that anglers want because no-one talks to them. Only when there is a meeting of minds can anything happen. Sorry if this sounds crude and rude but stop bleating and get stuck in.

Get hold of a copy of Reel Life, the EA's house magazine.

I can only say that, for those who make the effort to get to know their local EA fisheries guys,they are (in my region at least) the most helpful and understanding bunch I've come across.

Where else in this country could you, as a general mwmber of the public, ring up the EA, speak to someone who has no idea of who you are and request copies of some obscure netting surveys for example? And not only that, but they turn up in the post less than a week later and the guy rings you up to see if there's any other way they can help.

I think it is essential that we as anglers are properly licenced.

Other than the points put out by Jeff, I think that by being licenced, we as anglers are saying to the rest of society that we are responsible, not only for the sport we love, but for the conservation of the rivers and lakes which give us this great pastime.

Although I am a staunch Tory, I was as sick as heck when IDS suggested that we eliminate the fishing licence.

The ?23 a year I pay for my licence is money well spent.

I agree, that ?23 is well worth the money for a yearly fishing lisense!...
And, the regulation does mean show that fishing is trying act responsibly.

I actually feel that the clubs should do more, and demand to see an anglers liscense before handing over a club book. They say it's not their job, but it would make life a lot easier for the EA if they knew, or were assured, that every angler on a club lake was liscensed.I also feel it would help build bridges between clubs and the EA.

Jeff already commented, get involved and see, or at least be constructive towards what the EA try to do... I was suprised last week when he said," my mate from the EA is coming down later!".... it never really occured to me until then, that they are there FOR OUR BENIFIT!...

Ron,
Ditto.

You could try looking at the EAs web site to see what they do for angling and why you pay a licence fee. I accept they have their falts at times, but on balance it's worth being licenced.

No Pay, No Say as the saying goes!

I do accept that the EA let those who don't pay have at time to much say......But that's a story for another day.

Might just give'em a slamming over that at some point.

All Coarse fisheries work by the EA is paid for by the licence fee. Most salmonid work is paid for by Grant in Aid from central government.

The licence fee could be the mechanism by which a single national angling body could be funded and all licence holders would thereby be members directly.

The NAFAC view is that the licence should only cost as much as it takes to police the licence holders and that all fisheries work should be paid for by government as the whole population of the England and Wales benefits from the ecological advantages of better fisheries.

Certainly working through the local consultative and being involved in a club committee I see a very hard working bunch of people if the EA fisheries department, even if they are under resourced and having to cut back on functions because of lack of central funding. If your club fails to bid for funds for fisheries projects you and they cannot complain about lack of effort locally. The EA can only do what anglers ask of it and too many anglers and their organisations do not ask for anything!

Keep the licence and keep a say in how the money is spent.

My question was why do anglers have to buy licences. Amatuer footballers don't, cricketers don't, rugby players don't, dart players don't, horse riders don't. In fact, I can't think of anyone else, apart from those mentioned in my original thread, who have to buy licences to participate in their chosen sport. They all use facilities, the same as us.

The Government/Envage have a duty to everyone, not just anglers, to ensure that pollution and suchlike is kept under control, the Government does so by taxing us, so isn't buying a fishing licence tantamout to being taxed again?

Isn't the situation the same as the old double taxation when you buy a brand new car upon which you pay special car tax, and then pay VAT on that "special car tax" (viz, tax on tax)

Colin,

Not wanting to split hairs, but, I do believe (not totally certain) that amateur race drivers pay for a license to practice their sport. Also, proponents of certain martial arts and instructors had to be licensed some years back, but I don't know if this is still the case.

Regarding your double taxation statement.; whist you are right in your assumption vis-a-vis pollution, I do not believe that the government is responsible for stocking rivers, streams and canals, nor are they responsible for fish conservation projects, nor are they responsible for providing safe havens for fish during adverse/flood consditions. All of which a are activities that our license fee goes towards funding.

I am personally very content with the current fee and would have no problems paying even more to ensure my sport is still there for my chidren and grandchildren to enjoy.

The E/A in the North East (Northumbria Area) is to put ?5000-00 into two match events, one on the Tyne and one on the Wear. These are to replace the costly (?900-00/day) and inefficient river surveys to establish what stocks are where, and where to stock future fish.

I should have added that these are not 'one off' events, but over a period a database can be built on the rivers fish population, at least that is what tie E/A is hoping.