The Times has another go at fishing

C

Chris Bishop

Guest
The Times is getting rather fond of sticking one into coarse fishing.

Now one of it's star columnists is at it - read down to the end and you can leave a comment.

Libby Purves
 
B

BAZ (Angel of the North) aka Fester

Guest
what a load of trash he/she/It has written.
Completely unfounded and utter tripe.
How people can buy a newspaper of this calibre is beyond me.
 
B

BAZ (Angel of the North) aka Fester

Guest
If he/she/It wants to debate the subject then let he/she/It come on here and debate it. Why should we up their ratings?
 
R

Ron 'The Hat' Clay (ACA-Life Member)

Guest
I stopped taking The Times some years ago when similar articles started to appear like this one.

Who is this bird anyway. Probably a member od Peta.

Probably no-one special.

Martin Salter is doing a fine job in Parliament for anglers at the moment. It's a pity he's Labour.
 
S

Steve Spiller

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 11, 2005
Messages
15,191
Reaction score
4
Location
Bristol
Dear Libby,

What a load of CRAP!
You obviously know as much about angling as you do about immigrants, very little!

Why don't you "try" and I mean try, to write something interesting for a change.

You could look at the murders and suffering going on in Iraq or Israel.
Maybe you could look at our useless judicial system, the one that lets murderers, rapists and peadophiles walk free after serving a third of their sentance.

As regards angling, don't knock it until you've tried it.
You might find you enjoy the peace and tranquility, being at one with nature is true therapy.

Your Sincerely.

S.T.Spiller

I wonder if I will get a reply???
 
R

Ron 'The Hat' Clay (ACA-Life Member)

Guest
Because I don't vote for that party Eddie.
 
E

EC

Guest
Ron, surely the point is that he is actually doing a good job, as you have pointed out, does it really matter which party he represents? That he is being allowed to spend his time on anging says a great deal in my opinion I genuinely don't recall any previous MP or political party doing a 'fine job' for anglers!
 
N

Nigel Connor(ACA ,SAA)

Guest
Disregarding the usual platitudes as to pain and cruelty, do you not think she has raised a question that from a purely ethical point of view that one day may have to be debated?

Namely is it more acceptable to kill a fish to eat or subject it to repeated capture for pleasure?

This question goes to the crux of how we may one day have to justify the continuation of our sport in the face of a call for its restriction.Dont forget that in Germany catch and release is I believe no longer legal for this very reason.

I have to say that her point of view was one which did spring to mind when I heard this issue covered on 5Live at the weekend and especially when I read Richard Lee's somewhat incendiary comments.

To an outsider, I fear the taking of fish for the pot is easier to justify.Knee jerk reactions to issues like this doesn't get the sport anywhere.We need a proper rational and well thought out response.Anyone volunteering to write a counter article for the Times?
 
A

Andy "the Dog" Nellist (SAA) (ACA)

Guest
In this country shooters shoot mainly clay pigeons or birds reared for shooting and anglers put their catches back. We respect our quary and the result is that the rivers are full of fish and the skies full of birds.
 
R

Ron 'The Hat' Clay (ACA-Life Member)

Guest
I fully agree Eddie, Martin does appear to be doing a fine job and I would support him if I lived in Reading.

(Now wait for the comments - Clay crosses floor - :eek:))

Nigel, This arguement goes around in my brain many times. I often dream about it. (Seriously).

I do kill a lot of the fish I catch, and eat them too.

And yes we do need a fully rational response to comments like those of Purvess'

Kneejerk stuff will not do.
 
H

honslow

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 14, 2005
Messages
2,417
Reaction score
3
We don't have to justify angling - it's perfectly legal. And how could they ever ban it anyway? You could never police a ban on angling.
Political correctness could prove the thorn in our side though...
 
H

honslow

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 14, 2005
Messages
2,417
Reaction score
3
Andy's hit the nail on the head. We're conservationists first and foremost - something which is impossible for anyone to deny.
 
R

Ron 'The Hat' Clay (ACA-Life Member)

Guest
Good point Greg.

Let's have some other well thought out responses.
 
N

Nigel Connor(ACA ,SAA)

Guest
Grag, you have got your head stuck in the sand if you believe we can sell ourselves as conservationists first and foremost.

Certainly some anglers are and do a fine job in promoting consevation but we will be judged by the lowest common denominator and that is the too large a minority who leave litter and discarded line, pay scant regard to both the fish they catch and the environment they fish in.

How can a heavily stcocked carp puddle dug oout for profit where the fish are there solely for capture and rely on bait for the bulk of their diet be justified on conservation grounds?It can be justified on other grounds I accept but hardly conservation?

As to introducing bans which are unenforceable have a look at the Hunting With Dogs Act for a prime example.

Complacency is our major enemy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top