Anti's started already

I switched the radio on this morning to hear a PETA guy berating angling, the very next day after the hunting ban came into force,...it didn't take em long, did anyone hear the full phone-in?

Radio 5 has a listen again function onm there website what programme was it?

Yeah I heard it all. It was the phone-in after Breakast with Victoria Derbyshire.

Same old story really. The anti's were talking about "those poor fish suffering and then suffocating when they are out of the water" etc. They kept on changing the people in the studio. They had a guy from the Scotish CA (supporting angling) and one from the League Against Cruel Sports (obviously against it) for the first ten minutes then they left. Then they welcomed a guy from PETA who then basically had the rest of the show all to himself. There was no one in the studio to support angling.

However, it wasn't just about angling. It was initially about shooting as well but it soon turned into a discussion about animal welfare in general (ie. battery hens etc). The worrying thing is how many people seem to equate hunting, fishing, animal testing and farming practices as the same thing. No one mentioned the fact that we don't bloody kill the fish! Some anglers phoned up and did well but ,again, there was no mention of the fact we don't kill the fish. They interviewed Martin James on the banks of the Ribble and he did well (he explained that we are the eyes and ears of the rivers and waterways etc) but he was only on for a minute or two.

The PETA guy kept on making a big thing about fish suffocating out of the water and came up with a ridiculous statistic (that he offered no evidence for) that said that 40% of fish die when they go back into the water. No mention of the fact that many anglers have caught the same fish again again over many years etc.

The overwhelming sense I got from the show is that PETA are determined to portray all animals as having human emotions. It's as if they believe 'Babe' was a true story and didn't involve any actors. They are also utterly intolerant. I'm someone who believes that people should have the freedom to make their own choices and decisions but they are determined that everyone should do exactly as they say.

Rooster,

I am behind most of what you say, but a lot of anglers, including myself, DO kill fish.

In fact on average I kill about 50 of the fish I catch a year.

I think you will find that the antis are not so much against the killing of fish but the releasing of the fish you have caught.

Fair enough Ron, my mistake. Personally I don't kill fish but I've got no problems with people like you who do. It's YOUR choice! The problem with PETA and co is that whatever you do they will find fault with it. There's no middle ground for them. If I recall correctly I think someone did actually say "would you mind if I killed all the fish I caught then?" and of course the PETA guy said "yes, I'm against all harm against animals" etc. Of course that includes both killing the fish AND catch and release. You just can't win. They want fishing banned. Full stop.

One of the positive things that came out of the show was that more people seemed to feel that farming practices were of much greater importance than shooting or fishing. But of course PETA seem to be against all forms of farming too!

There is a level of anti who will say that if fish are being caught for food, that's OK.

Organisations like PETA and ALF are totally extreme and if they REALLY had their way they would ban the eating of fruits, plants and seeds, because these things are living organisms and can feel pain.

In fact, during a recent trip to the USA I found out that there is a chemical company tring to find out if it's possible to manufacture synthetic food that is totally non-organic.

I kid you not.

And can I tell you the sorts of people who are funding this.

The likes of Pamela Anderson and Britney Spears, that's who.

Coming back to my first paragraph, this level of anti will state that if you catch and release a fish, you are torturing it and using it as a plaything!

Be aware of all the anti's arguments.

Be very aware.

Ron..Paul Mc Cartney too supports them financially.

They are without any sense of balance or understanding of the issues and it almost seems that pro-fishing arguments have to sink to their basic level of misinformation and dramatisation to counter their ridiculous views. It wasn't long ago they did a publicity poster of a dog hanging from a hook!

Angling conservation issues seem to fly right over their heads and I doubt they even appreaciate that in nature animals and fish eat other fish etc.

Angling really does have to come together to counter their ridiculous arguments and learn better how to deal with the media who love any sensationalised issues like hunting etc.

So if people in PETA etc dont like the way animals are treated,I can only persume(spelling)that they are vegies & dont have anything on their homes made form any animal products.I think not.

"said that 40% of fish die when they go back into the water"

That figure changes every time it's quoted. It's been as high as 90% in the past.

Of course it can't be substantiated, none of their verbal diarrhoea can.

I don't know how Pamela Anderson can call herself a vegetarian - I've seen the video and she definiteley eats "meat".

PETA are a dangerous thing - completely bonkers but with a huge budget.

How you combat them in the press I'm not sure. Because of who their supporters are they get loads of free publicity, and anyone trying to present a rational argument against them finds it difficult to overcome the emotive way they present animals as equal to people.

The only note of optimism I can offer is that most ordinary folks I talk to at work or out and about seem to be either supportive of angling, particularly if you have a bit of time to explain the conservation aspects of the sport.

While it never pays to be complacent, I don't think we should credit PETA and their ilk with as much effectiveness as they would like to believe they have.

Problem is they only have to persuade enough MPs to their way of thinking and angling may go the way of hunting witn dogs.

I know this is a dangerous position to take (and we should not) but do you think the government will have any appetite to ban angling after the shambles the fox hunting legislation has left us in ?

Dont think so.

I don't want to appear too complacent - but think about it - almost everyone in this country is an angler, or is related to an angler, or is friends with an angler.

So long as we remain vigilant I don't think any Govt. would dare even think about banning fishing.

I think the real danger is from stealth bans, by which I mean banning specific angling practices (eg livebaiting), or creating no-fishing zones.

A spokeswoman for the 'Campaign Against Angling' ie PETA was spouting off on Merdian TV's Tonight programme. She said that most fish that are returned die and that because they (fish) can recognise each other, making them intelligent, they will feel pain.

Recognise each other? Mmmm? Beem watching too much Finding Nemo I think!

Its a serious point though - the more films & cartoons sentimentalise animals then the easier it becomes for the likes of PETA to sell the cruelty argument.

I have to agree with Martin. I can't even begin to put angling and foxhunting in the same league. The only people that can do that are these crazy extremist idiots on PETA etc. I really can't see why people are entertaining these idiots by worrying about the future of angling. Angling is an institution in this country and while it remains popular no government will contemplate banning it.

It does not really matter what the 'ordinary man in the street' thinks about fishing, because the 'ordinary man in the street' will not make his feelings heard.
Look at foxhunting, generally most people have no feeling one way or the other regarding whether it is acceptable or not, but a small percentage of the population are passionatley for or against it.
Unfortunatley it seems that anyone fighting for the 'rights' of the underdog, whether it be a fox, fish, bird or even poor old misunderstood criminal always gets the better publicity. On television the anti's are usually assisted by a vegetarian 'do good' presenter such as Fiona Phillips who would not accept any evidence for the pro cause even if it was 100% common sense and provable.
I'm afraid we shall eventually have our fishing pleasures scrutinised and some form of control enforced upon us. As we 'the fishermen of England' are only too keen to critisise each others branch of the sport we make ourselves weaker.
We have various bodies which all claim to represent us in some way or other, this typically divides us as a whole making us easier smaller targets. We should all be of one voice and make our demise something a political party dare not think about without the risk of losing millions of votes at the next general election.

Its time for us to take the fight to the antis, we must unite behind FACT, organize ourselves and go forward.

I must back woodies last posting regarding the survey figures rubbish "40% of fish die on return to the water" if that was so then wanderer is a very lucky fish indeed.