Barrie Rickards

S

Steve Spiller

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 11, 2005
Messages
15,191
Reaction score
4
Location
Bristol
I found this to be an interesting thought, catch and kill, no release.

I can see where Barrie is coming from, but could it really happen here?

I know the anti's and tree huggers would love to see this happen, but what about fishery owners? It would put many commercial fisheries out of business if they had to replace their fish stocks on that scale and what sort of outcry would there be if Benson or Twotone got knocked on the head after being caught?

It simply wouldn't happen, or at least I hope it never happens!
 
M

MarkTheSpark

Guest
Much common sense, Barry. As you say, there's little recognition of the force for anvironmental good that angling is; I think the pheasant shooters have a similar effect, preserving thick cover to the benefit of much other wildlife. Who cares if it's so they can barrel some flying chickens!

I don't think anyone cares about what Paul McCartney thinks or says; his disastrous marriage and even more disastrous solo career rather nullify any notion that he's currently on the planet.

I'm sure we'll always disagree about the RSPB. Maybe not. But if the RSPB has a downer on anglers, it's because angling hasn't engaged the RSPB properly in serious debate. We must bear in mind that the RSPB has to take its members' opinions into account, and if they currently don't want to share with us, it's the RSPB's prerogative to chuck us off.

In a fairer and better world, angling would put its case better, and the RSPB would use some imagination to see where both their membership (of which I am one) and anglers can share open spaces.

Regards Ray Webb, I heard a sad story a couple of decades ago that his mental health got such that he papered over his windows and would, when the post arrived, post it back out of the letterbox. I look forward to reading your account of the happier times in his life.
 
L

Laurie Harper

Guest
That's the point of the catch and kill policy. Governments are relying on the fact that anglers will not want to kill the fish they catch and that they will stop fishing as a result. Cunning and we must resist any attempts to introduce it here.

Must challenge the "fish don't feel pain" argument. I don't know what the truth is (and nor does anyone), but we should be wary of relying on it. According to our present state of knowledge, they don't, but if someone manages to prove they do one day, it could potentially do us a lot of damage.

There are plenty of other good and positive things we can say about angling, so let's not rely too heavily on that argument. I accept that my actions may cause a fish some pain, discomfort or whatever. As a human (just...), I'm at the top of the food chain and, like other top predators, being able to do what I like with other species comes with the territory. I don't need to justify whatI do to myself by claiming it doesn't hurt the fish.
 
M

MarkTheSpark

Guest
Being top of the food chain doesn't obviate anyone from causing unnecessary cruelty, Laurie. You could use the argument you put forward to justify, for example, bullfighting.

As it happens, I agree with you that angling causes fish discomfort, but not so much discomfort that, within a matter of seconds, those fish caught settle down and begin feeding again. If they were still suffering, they wouldn't feed; indeed, the first sign that something's wrong in an aquarium is when the fish stop feeding because of distress.

The bigger picture is, as Barry says, that without angling dozens of rivers would have no caretakers. Tree-huggers don't go fish-watching. I had an argument with my errant neice once, who'd beeing chucking stones into swims to scare the poor fish away from the nasty angler. I won it by asking which species of fish she was hoping to save. She didn't have a clue of course.

Angling is, on balance, good for fish and a lot of other wildlife. If you're challenged about your sport, ask the challenger for their alternative plan on monitoring fish/river health, who is going to administer it, and how it's going to be paid for. Then, in the unlikely event that they have any answers, ask them which species of fish they'd like to save and where, and what they think are the main problems with the river environment. Then they'll look foolish.
 
R

Ron 'The Hat' Clay (ACA)

Guest
"I can see where Barrie is coming from but can it happen here?"

Yes Steve, my belief is that it can!

We have all seen the way Brown is disregarding the Irish vote on Europe. Brown obviously does not believe in democracy and as in the past I would warn all of us that this government is up to no good. Before long we will have a European superstate and the Germans, the Swiss and Uncle Tom Cobleigh and all will have to tow the European line.

And that will mean angling laws similar to those in Germany and Switzerland, or even worse.
 
Mr Cholmondeley-Corker (PaSC)

Mr Cholmondeley-Corker (PaSC)

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2007
Messages
13,768
Reaction score
40
Location
Cheshire
Too right Ron

I think most people have missunderstood the catch and kill principle.

The greenies and the antis don't want us to kill everything we catch, they want us to <u>only fish for the table and not for sport</u>. ie there would be no need for commercial 'carp' fisheries as match fishing for 100lb of carp would be illeagal (perhaps it should be anyway /forum/smilies/tongue_out_smiley.gif).

From the antis point of view this tests us as conservationists, not just as anglers. Why? Because if we truly care about the fish welfare and our interest is to conserve fish stocks in the UK then we won't catch and kill them. Simple as that.

But come on, be honest. Most anglers are interested in conserving fish stocks because they enjoy going out to catch them. How many anglers would maintain an active interest in fish conservation if fishing was illeagal? This is a critical question. Becausethe angler has a 'selfish motive' to catch fish he maitains an interest in conservation of fish and their environment. Hence, anglers are the guardians of the river. Restrict angling and you can say good bye to the eyes and ears on the river bank and say hello to canoeists, cyclists, hikers, dog walkers, picnickers and, worst of all, poachers with a free reign to empty the rivers.

Going back to commercials. Perhpas the inroduction of catch and kill in the UK will result in a massive increase in commercial trout waters! Where you have a limit and catch for the table. Will limits be allowed though, hmmm....
 
R

Ron 'The Hat' Clay (ACA)

Guest
Matt,

You are quite right of course. We as anglers have a vested interest in maintaning good stocks of fish in our waterways and that means maintaining clean unpolluted rivers and stillwaters.

Without organisations like the ACA, which are supported almost 100% by anglers, our rivers would be open sewers and our lakes -cesspits.

Whilst ever organisations like The Labour Party and leaders like Gordon Brown are allowed to thrive, there will be a threat to field sports. It happened to foxhunting, didn't it? Angling is just another field sportand in some eyes is even more cruel than foxhunting. Make no mistake, if he could, Brown would have us banned, no matter what certain other Labour MPs might say.
 
Peter Jacobs

Peter Jacobs

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 21, 2001
Messages
31,034
Reaction score
12,212
Location
In God's County: Wiltshire
To instigate a 'catch and kill' law is as laughable as it would be unenforcable!

Just as the ban on the use of dogs in foxhunting is in England and Wales.

Imagine for a moment, even in a small Country like Switzerland, how many enforcement officers it would take to 'police' this stupid law?

Seems to me like it was brought-in to pacify the Green contingent as quid pro qou for support on other more pressing problems.

I have quite a few angling friends in Germany who totally ignore the rule and have never seen anyone trying to enforce it.
 
R

Ron 'The Hat' Clay (ACA)

Guest
Good for the Germans and good for the Swiss for disobeying these ridiculous laws.
 
JIMMY---PAAS

JIMMY---PAAS

Banned
Banned
Joined
Jan 4, 2007
Messages
2,573
Reaction score
1
Location
GLASGOW
Ron; Every post that you put up, you,ve got to bring G. Brown in to it, You,re the sort off person how will never be happy NO mater how is PM.
 
R

Ron 'The Hat' Clay (ACA)

Guest
Maybe I will and maybe I won't Jimmy.

But we are supposed to live in a democracy. I'll not go into what that means but you can look it up on Google.

I, and all free men in a true democracy should balk at a person who takes over, not only as leader of a political party but ofa nation, without the will of that nation!!

And one who does not take heed of a democratically chosen decision, namely the will of the Irish people on the European issue.

Such behavoir is no better than what Mugabe is doing at the moment in Zimbabwe.
 
Mr Cholmondeley-Corker (PaSC)

Mr Cholmondeley-Corker (PaSC)

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2007
Messages
13,768
Reaction score
40
Location
Cheshire
Ron

Love em or hate em, he labour party was democratically voted into power by teh people.

The currently leader was democratically voted for by the party. If the country votes for em than the country gives em the power to choose their own leader.
 
R

Ron 'The Hat' Clay (ACA)

Guest
This is something I personally have an issue with Matt.

Yes, we do vote in a party to form a government and to make decisions on behalf of the people.

However when it comes to its leadership, in this case a leader who will become Prime Minister, then the party needs to go to the country.
 
JIMMY---PAAS

JIMMY---PAAS

Banned
Banned
Joined
Jan 4, 2007
Messages
2,573
Reaction score
1
Location
GLASGOW
Ron; I dont need to Google it.

Matt; You,re post is very true; Ron will have to Google it to under-stand it.
 
Mr Cholmondeley-Corker (PaSC)

Mr Cholmondeley-Corker (PaSC)

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2007
Messages
13,768
Reaction score
40
Location
Cheshire
The time will come.

Sooner or later some one will actually notice that he only has one good eye and makes unnecessary movements with his mouth as well has having zero presence and no charisma.
 
F

Fred Bonney

Guest
When will it sink in Ron?

In this country we do not, and have nevervoted for a Prime Minister, or come to that a President.

Just note those that do vote for a Head of State, and what becomes of that Head of State, once he has power.

No thankyou never.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top