I sadly concur with the historic ineptitude Graham. I certainly care but did not sign the BS sponsored Petition and as you know first hand I fish some of the affected rivers.
I've seriously thought about it since the petition first appeared and was most definitely wavering with that initial choice. But now I'm totally convinced the petition is naive in its aim and wording and will potentially set back any progress even further. My opinion is further reinforced by the nature of subsequent comments from some of the leading voices, especially recently by Steve Pope. I have a lot of time for Steve ever since I met him on the banks of the Severn years ago. But on this one, he's so far off the mark it's almost funny but sadly isn't.
I have no doubt whatsoever the signature numbers will grow but I'm expecting nothing more than the normal Westminster response when petitions reach this first stage: an acknowledgement and then a response generated by a consultation emanating from a nondescript Committee Room in the bowels of Parliament saying "non-lethal methods are already in existence". Anyone expecting a full debate in The House, and there seems to be a few, is going to be severely disappointed.
What progress is that Neil? if its the moving of an otter from the inside of a fenced fishery to god knows where imo that's lip service not progress, it moves the problem elsewhere and its entirely possible that by the time one of the very few that is licenced to trap otters arrives the fishery will have suffered lots of stock damage, certainly if an otter has found its way inside a fence it will have taken stock from the fishery before it is discovered.