Angling Trust - have your say.

chav professor · Apr 21, 2014

The Close season debate rumbles on.... the Angling Trust has entered the debate via Martin salter - as a way of measuring anglers opinions regarding the abolition of the close season.

here is the crux of this poll.

a. The Angling Trust should lobby opinion and seek a final solution to the close season debate.

b. The Angling Trust should focus on other issues.

Two solutions... tried to not make it too loaded. Just thought as a question of limited resources and priority.... be interesting to see what anyone thought.... if in-deed anyone has an opinion.

Now how do you do the poll thingy?

binka · Apr 21, 2014

I think that, given the many far more serious threats to our rivers that have been listed tirelessly throughout numerous threads, any concentration on a closed season debate is ignoring the herd of elephants in the corner of the room.

That suits my standpoint on the closed season but I think I can honestly say that I would answer the same if it didn't, it's a matter of priority.

In my opinion those other threats potentially represent individually, never mind collectively, far more damage to our rivers than any amount of current closed season fishing would probably do.

Stick me down for a b.

chav professor · Apr 21, 2014

very early days... would welcome as much input as possible.... democracy in action? Only takes a second to poll...

Peter Jacobs · Apr 21, 2014

I firmly believe that there are far more important topics for the Angling Trust to be involved with, and most of which are not as divisive as the Close Season Issue.

chav professor · Apr 21, 2014

A lot of people have far more important things to worry about.... like fishing..... Angling politics is the sh** end of the stick.

chav professor · Apr 21, 2014

13 people? not exactly a mandate.............. result is interesting thus far

binka · Apr 21, 2014

chav professor said:
13 people? not exactly a mandate.............. result is interesting thus far

That's just the thing Chav... the enemy within, divide and conquer and now apathy

mg:

no-one in particular · Apr 22, 2014

Since the internet, there must have been a million polls, forum debates, opinions and answers etc from anglers.. And from what i have observed, it never changes-Whats the point of another one?
I think the AT should gather opinions, polls etc from all the legislative bodies, tackle trade associations, fish welfare groups, animal welfare groups, university studies, scientific opinion/facts. The list could be long. And then assimilate all the information and poll results and form its own stance on the issue. It should have a stance after all, it is the only angling organization of the country. Not to have one on an important angling issue is wrong.
This I feel would be a far more useful exercise than just another millionth and 1 poll of anglers.

chav professor · Apr 22, 2014

markg said:
Since the internet, there must have been a million polls, forum debates, opinions and answers etc from anglers.. And from what i have observed, it never changes-Whats the point of another one?
I think the AT should gather opinions, polls etc from all the legislative bodies, tackle trade associations, fish welfare groups, animal welfare groups, university studies, scientific opinion/facts. The list could be long. And then assimilate all the information and poll results and form its own stance on the issue. It should have a stance after all, it is the only angling organization of the country. Not to have one on an important angling issue is wrong.
This I feel would be a far more useful exercise than just another millionth and 1 poll of anglers.

And come to the conclusion? Leave well alone and focus on the more pressing issues that effect angling.

One thing for certain, removing a close season will not have the same impact as say.... fighting hydroelectric, dredging, habitat degradation.... Where is the passion for the real issues?

Jeff Woodhouse · Apr 22, 2014

markg said:
Whats the point of another one?

I have to agree with that on fora such as FM and others, no point. Plus, yours doesn't ask the questions in the right way, Chav, not for me at least.

I like fighting battles I think I have a chance of winning, such as one small one that a start was made on just last week. Nationally it will be of no importance, but to local anglers it might mean a lot and in one years time we could have a good mile of fishing restored to anglers. For the close season, I couldn't win that one alone, but if MS wants to stick his neck above the parapet I don't mind helping him get shot at.

Fighting for no CS would be low priority of me, top of the list is hydro and here we are making some gains, in this area, I hope. As for pollutions, as I've said elsewhere, I'm happy to work with Thames Water now in identifying any problems and addressing them with the people that matter (Little Marlow STW last year, for example.) Also, they are carrying out some work on revolving grills on their abstraction pipes and if they work I am hopeful the will be fitted to all abstraction pipes in the near future, a measure which alone could save umpteen millions of fish and fry.

chav professor said:
Where is the passion for the real issues?

So there is the passion - and there's more I want to do still. Never give up, NEVER give up!

Or, put another way [ame]http://youtu.be/YVz211iI26o[/ame]

Here endeth the lesson!

chav professor · Apr 22, 2014

There is an impossibly difficult way to word any poll...... but the gist or spirit of the poll is about right.

I agree you have to choose battles... I suspects that when it comes to battles, the EA repealing the close season is cheap chips! an almost... 'that'll keep 'em quiet'.....

The real issues have good science to contradict the current policy.... For example hydroelectricity... on the out set, hydroelectricity is green and makes people feel all warm and mushy inside.... 'hey, were saving the planet!'...

Financially its nonviable, environmental impact is disastrous, has its roots in climate change policy that is known to be flawed. saves about 3 cows f@rts in CO2 omissions.

Bound by government policy - these projects are being pushed through

Peter Jacobs · Apr 22, 2014

chav professor said:
There is an impossibly difficult way to word any poll...... but the gist or spirit of the poll is about right.

I think the wording of the 3 choices is pretty much succinct.

I mean, how much more plain can it be?

Sort it Out!

Get on with other issues, or

Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn! . . . . . . .

laguna · Apr 22, 2014

focus on other issues, abstraction, hydroelectric, boycott fisheries that stock chub and barbel...

Peter Jacobs · Apr 22, 2014

laguna said:
focus on other issues, abstraction, hydroelectric, boycott fisheries that stock chub and barbel...

Then throw in Predation (of all types) for good measure!

laguna · Apr 22, 2014

Peter Jacobs said:
Then throw in Predation (of all types) for good measure!

natural indigenous predation being the exception, cormorants and non-native species, eutrophication the list of 'things to focus on' many of which should take priority over the CS debate imo!

chav professor · Apr 22, 2014

Never personally had a massive issue with barbel or Chub in still waters.... Chub seem to thrive... and that you can stock barbel in still waters kind of adds up to the quirky differences between still water and fresh water stocking policies.

Many commercial still waters don't need to adhere to strict controls of biodiversity. its artificial to stock barbel... but then so is sturgeon, cat fish and F1 carp...

laguna · Apr 22, 2014

Just my beef, boycott em I say!

both chub and barbel thrive in running water and as I understand it barbel dont breed successfully (if at all) in stillwater?

chav professor · Apr 22, 2014

best way... vote with your feet!

Judas Priest · Apr 22, 2014

chav professor said:
its artificial to stock barbel... .

and so it was/is to put them into most river systems.

hunters moon · Apr 23, 2014

binka said:
I think that, given the many far more serious threats to our rivers that have been listed tirelessly throughout numerous threads, any concentration on a closed season debate is ignoring the herd of elephants in the corner of the room.

That suits my standpoint on the closed season but I think I can honestly say that I would answer the same if it didn't, it's a matter of priority.

In my opinion those other threats potentially represent individually, never mind collectively, far more damage to our rivers than any amount of current closed season fishing would probably do.

Stick me down for a b.

that's it in a nut-shell binka.

Angling Trust - have your say.

Angling trust priority s

sort out close season

focus on other issues

don't care, it does not represent my views

Well-known member

binka

Guest

Well-known member

Moderator

Well-known member

Well-known member

binka

Guest

Well-known member

Well-known member

Moaning Marlow Meldrew

Well-known member

Moderator

Well-known member

Moderator

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member