Of course it was loaded. You four are the ones bleating on about how much you CARE about the environment, the fish and fishing. So cards on the table - what do you actively do other than whinge about keeping the CS? Peter has graciously answered - nothing. Fair play.
Jeff,
What I do for fishing is my business, I have no need to use it to give weight to any questions I might ask or be asked in any debate. Your question was loaded as you admit, loaded in away that was designed to belittle anyone who states that do not serve on any consultative or rivers trusts.
Try asking all participants of this debate the same question, for me and I will be straight with you I will treat it with the contempt it deserves.
You are clearly losing the plot, and stamping your feet like a little child because you can’t at present get your own way (abolish the CS).
You have the AT to try to achieve that for you, a trust that represents a minority of UK anglers do you seriously expect the majority to sit back and allow a minority decided the fate of the CS?
I am not a member of the AT, I know it has done and is doing some good work so I don’t condemn it out of hand expect on the CS issue. As a non member of the trust I have had the words “No pay - no say” quoted at me.
So does that mean that non members of the trusts comments in this debate will be ignored? Does it also mean that non AT members have no say in what happens regarding angling matters that affect all UK anglers?
Does it mean that an organisation that does not have the full backing of UK anglers has to right to be so arrogant as to say to me and every other non member YOU don’t count?
The Crow states that interested parties that might support the retention of the CS have not been named, I respectfully suggest that neither has Martin Salter or the AT named anyone.
All we know is that,
“it has also caused others to ask us to re-ignite the river close season debate and to make formal approaches to the Environment Agency and to government.”
Added to that he names two AT members one for the CS Keith Arthur and one against the retention of the CS Dave Harrell, and states that Steve Pope has announced his position has shifted (again).
So Martin thinks it’s fair to say that the ground is shifting in angling.
So there you have it folks, this debate was facilitated because Steve Pope’s position has shifted and Dave Harrell wants to abolish the CS not forgetting the “the others” alluded to by Martin and Keith Arthur want’s to keep it.
Quite laughable.
Keep pecking Crow, you’ll have no beak left at this rate.
Regards
Ray