River Close Season – Is it time for a rethink?

[Ray Wood 1]

There are two certainties involved in this re-think, one, neither side will change the others sides minds, two, this debate both on here and on Martin Salter’s AT blog will have no bearing regarding keeping the CS in its present form, changing its dates or abolishing it.

Both sides believe they are right and that their reasons for either keeping the CS or changing/abolishing it are right no amount of debating will ever change that.

The AT will not use this debate as its springboard to do anything or nothing regarding the CS, that will be decided by other influences.

Mark Lloyd has made it clear elsewhere that the trust will listen to its members and its members concerns, so I think that safely rules out non members in any decision it may reach.

Mr Lloyd claims that widespread calls for the CS dates to be changed made the AT facilitate this debate. I did not see widespread calls, what I saw was a few named anglers suggesting things.

One has to wonder what the real reasons were that caused the AT to start the CS season issue.

Debate all you like it will have no bearing on anything the AT do unless you are a member.

Regards
Ray

 

[chav professor]

The term 'dogma' does not encompass my opinion[/quoteI'm afraid Chav, that your post would suggest the opposite. Dogmatic you certainly are, and a catch all Close Season certainly does not serve all well. Making strident statements doesn't make you correct. You should do some homework on freshwater ecology.

As I stated earlier, I don't fish for Chub (or any River fish) until September, I just don't think it's fair, with the low water, low oxygen conditions while they try to recover from spawning. If you're happy to, I'm not going to stand in your way, it's your choice, after all, it's in season.

I'm out of this, when we get to using capitals to make a point, it's the literary version of shouting. I do agree with you however that the Status Quo is not likely to change.

Stu

I don't think you can reasonably expect someone to accept their views are dogmatic.

My point is as Ray's... no amount of debating will change views...... least of all by labeling others views as Dogmatic, based on history, or emotion..........

I try and stick to the issue in posting etiquette......

 

[Peter Jacobs]

Mark Lloyd has made it clear elsewhere that the trust will listen to its members and its members concerns, so I think that safely rules out non members in any decision it may reach. Mr Lloyd claims that widespread calls for the CS dates to be changed made the AT facilitate this debate. I did not see widespread calls, what I saw was a few named anglers suggesting things. One has to wonder what the real reasons were that caused the AT to start the CS season issue. Debate all you like it will have no bearing on anything the AT do unless you are a member.

That is a point that I have been concerned about ever since I read Martin Salter's piece.

It gives me concern that, in order to have a voice that is heard, then I would have to rejoin the Angling Trust . . . . . . . . .

Now, some ill-informed people seem to think that I am 100% anti-Angling Trust, when in fact that does not represent my views at all.

So, I am left with something of a dilemma to ponder . . . . . . .

 

[chav professor]

Will it listen to its members and represent their views... or will it go with the 'heavy weight' members....

 

[stu_the_blank]

I don't think you can reasonably expect someone to accept their views are dogmatic.

Chav, I don't expect you to accept anything, (or read it), that was my point. You actually keep agreeing with me.

A definition of Dogmatic

'you are stating an unsupported opinion as if it were absolute fact. Not ignorant, arrogant.
It comes from the word "dogma" - a doctrine concerning faith or morals formally stated and authoritatively proclaimed by a church.'

The High Church of the Close Season!

Sorry, I didn't mean to re-engage and I'm absolutely sure that if we ever meet on the bank or in the pub, we'd get on fine.

Chav, you really do need to go fishing mate!:wh

Stu

 

[chav professor]

Mines a Stella!... no wait... quite like a bottle of Desperado (tequila/lager with a slice of Lime).......

 

[Peter Jacobs]

Will it listen to its members and represent their views... or will it go with the 'heavy weight' members....

That is just another dilemma . . . . . . . . .

 

[stu_the_blank]

Mines a Stella!... no wait... quite like a bottle of Desperado (tequila/lager with a slice of Lime).......

You're on! We'd better arrange a cab, and a stomach pump!

Stu

---------- Post added at 04:15 ---------- Previous post was at 04:13 ----------

That is just another dilemma . . . . . . . . .

Be a heavyweight. Your opinion is as valid as the next man's. If fairness though, if you aren't a member, you won't get the chance.

Stu

 

[Ray Daywalker Clarke]

As i said, i would call back to see if theres anything new, i knew there wouldn't be, and there isn't.

Anglers don't have to worry how the AT members vote, their membership is a drop in the ocean amongst anglers, and are not anglings governing body.

The cs lobby will be back next year, with the same old same old.

Fish all waters all year, you pay for it when you get your license, and rivers will NOT be harmed, as the still waters has proved for many years now. Before someone says, you can stock still waters. mg: you can stock rivers as well, just ask the Barbel boys.

Over and out, might see you next year.

PS, Ray Wood, start getting ready for next years debate , you have a lot of catching up to do to catch the master, as your just the Apprentice , YOUR FIRED, well for this debate anyway .

 

[Ray Wood 1]

As i said, i would call back to see if theres anything new, i knew there wouldn't be, and there isn't.

Anglers don't have to worry how the AT members vote, their membership is a drop in the ocean amongst anglers, and are not anglings governing body.

The cs lobby will be back next year, with the same old same old.

Fish all waters all year, you pay for it when you get your license, and rivers will NOT be harmed, as the still waters has proved for many years now. Before someone says, you can stock still waters. mg: you can stock rivers as well, just ask the Barbel boys.

Over and out, might see you next year.

PS, Ray Wood, start getting ready for next years debate , you have a lot of catching up to do to catch the master, as your just the Apprentice , YOUR FIRED, well for this debate anyway .

Ray,
Your so last week, we moved on do try to keep up you’ll have missed that I am now a crackpot amongst the many things I have been called. Still one good thing I don’t stay logged into FM 24/7 far more things to do here than up in the marches who wants to chase sheep all day?

I bet Martin Salters glad you revived this debate as it was dying on its feet, same on the AT site seems that the celeb anglers don’t have that much support for changing the CS.

Martins off to Cuba SP is off to the BS show, so who’s going to look after things for them?

The AT may not be the governing body for angling but somehow they have manoeuvred themselves into a position of power who the government (apparently) listen to. I suppose there’s a lot to be said for not having officer/position elections in the halls of power and other places. Some may not be where they are today if they had been forced to stand for election.

Do you know what I say Ray, Furkum Hall I’m happy to be an ordinary angler who is a greedy,belligerent, dogmatic, crackpot I think that's what they call me.

As for firing me, you could not have afforded to employ me in the first place. I will look forward to being accused of being greedy and twisting your words in next years debate then me china plate.

Oh and you can’t use still waters as a guide to assuming it will be all right to scrap the rivers close season “Oh no you can’t” wait for the reply “Oh yes you can”

See you next year then.

All done in the best possible taste, no CS anti was harmed whilst writing this reply.

Regards
Ray

That's a wrap for tonight.

 

[rollingpinboy]

I originally had the impression that the Angling Trust was set up to represent 'All of Angling', whether any individual or any clubs/groups liked it or not! Even if you didn't join up and pay the dosh, i still think that any outside bodies and authorities, like the EA, would assume or believe that Angling and Anglers are 'All' represented by the Angling Trust and they see them as Angling's Governing Body. Am i right that the EA actually sponsors the AT and gives/gave them money, among'st others like the Tackle Trade? They definitely have input and the means to lobby inside parliament and somewhat influence and state views to others to change laws and things. I still think there is some problem within as to where the Specialist and Single Species Groups are feeling that they are not represented or listened too enough, even though they are paid up members! Obviously, these groups of anglers are seen as the minority, even though they are probably the most caring, knowledgeable and consider fish welfare and the habitat/environment more so than the majority of the membership. If the Angling Trust do go down the route of lobbying for 'Open all Year' on rivers on behalf of the Tackle Trade and Commercialism (which they seem to be heading for), then it will be a very sad day for Angling and will destroy any credibility that the Angling Trust/ACA have or once had regarding Conservation of fish, habitat and the protection of the riverine environment and its lifeforms as a whole. The ones who have orchestrated the call for change should be ashamed!

 

[chav professor]

They do not represent us in numbers..... But as a 'voice' it is a powerful one. It can be approached by the media and present an opinion or as a lobbying force to push issues.

The truth is, we all know politics is a humongous waste of time... until it effects something we enjoy doing. A dear departed friend was a political giant and was a massive force for good in angling....

Press, media, government - whatever! want to speak to ONE organisation. The Angling Trust is streets ahead of what used to poll as fishing 'opinion' when a TV fishing personality would speak for one and all.

Also need to remember Angling is a broad church.........

I have always said angling faces more harm from 'within' than any anti-angling bodies that these mysterious inner enemy's call the 'antis'.....

I have been a member of the Angling trust as an individual member and belong to a group where I vote to maintain 'group' membership. I won't disclose how tight it is........ A little thought, the Angling Trust is not as popular as perhaps it should be......

Specialist angling is poorly represented in the Angling Trust...... I rather like the sound of reforming the old NASA model...... perhaps as part of the angling trust.

 

[Bob Hornegold]

They do not represent us in numbers..... But as a 'voice' it is a powerful one. It can be approached by the media and present an opinion or as a lobbying force to push issues.

The truth is, we all know politics is a humongous waste of time... until it effects something we enjoy doing. A dear departed friend was a political giant and was a massive force for good in angling....

Press, media, government - whatever! want to speak to ONE organisation. The Angling Trust is streets ahead of what used to poll as fishing 'opinion' when a TV fishing personality would speak for one and all.

Also need to remember Angling is a broad church.........

I have always said angling faces more harm from 'within' than any anti-angling bodies that these mysterious inner enemy's call the 'antis'.....

I have been a member of the Angling trust as an individual member and belong to a group where I vote to maintain 'group' membership. I won't disclose how tight it is........ A little thought, the Angling Trust is not as popular as perhaps it should be......

Specialist angling is poorly represented in the Angling Trust...... I rather like the sound of reforming the old NASA model...... perhaps as part of the angling trust.

Chav,

How many individual members do they now have ?
Last time I heard it was less the 20,000 and we are suppose to have 1 million anglers in this country.
Yes there are affiliated clubs and groups, a left over from the old NFA and they are powerful within AT, the Freshwater groups are suppose to represent Specimen type fishing and as you rightly say, this does not appear to be very evident.
I think if there was to be a proposed change in the close season, it should come as a proposal from the EA, not AT as they have not got a mandate to represent the bulk of anglers.
Bob

 

[sam vimes]

Bob,
it would also be interesting to know how many of the individual members are matchmen that only join for access to Fishomania entry. I've heard quite a few match types that freely admit that they wouldn't join if it were not for the Fisho thing.

 

[Peter Jacobs]

How many individual members do they now have ? Last time I heard it was less the 20,000 and we are suppose to have 1 million anglers in this country.

Quite short of the mark bob.

Here is what Mark Lloyd had to say on aother thread here:

"We currently have 17,500 individual members, 3,700 of which are free junior members (under 18) and 1,300 of which are life members. We also have 1,422 club members with a combined membership of nearly 400,000 anglers."

So, if you subtract the free junior members and the life members (remember if you had life membership of the old ACA you automatically got it for the Angling Trust) you are then very close to the old ACA membership figure . . . . . . .

(see post #16 on this: http://www.fishingmagic.com/forums/beginners-improvers/347829-angling-trust-should-i-join-2.html)

 

[Bob Hornegold]

Quite short of the mark bob.

Here is what Mark Lloyd had to say on aother thread here:

"We currently have 17,500 individual members, 3,700 of which are free junior members (under 18) and 1,300 of which are life members. We also have 1,422 club members with a combined membership of nearly 400,000 anglers."

So, if you subtract the free junior members and the life members (remember if you had life membership of the old ACA you automatically got it for the Angling Trust) you are then very close to the old ACA membership figure . . . . . . .

(see post #16 on this: http://www.fishingmagic.com/forums/beginners-improvers/347829-angling-trust-should-i-join-2.html)

Peter,

Not that far of the mark 17,500 individual members !!
I belong to a number of clubs (6) they are all members of AT for the Match fishing and insurance cover.
So how many of the 400,000 club members are multiple memberships ?
They must think we cannot see through these figures, it's the Individual memberships that count, not the contrived Match sections that have to join to fish in the big competitions.

Bob

 

[stu_the_blank]

it should come as a proposal from the EA, not AT as they have not got a mandate to represent the bulk of anglers.

Bob, neither do the EA, they represent HM Govt. and by extension the EU. Do you really think that they have our best interests at heart?

If there is a proposal to alter/abolish the close season, it won't be because disorganised, fragmented and apathetic anglers ask for it, we wouldn't know how to and we'd never agree.

I would suggest a proposal to 'harmonise' regulations across the EU (quietly backed by commercial interests) is likely be the vehicle, we will bluster and moan, the EA will fall in line, the ATr will be consulted, patronised and then ignored.

The only chance we ever did have to influence the debate is to stand together, pigs might fly!

Stu

 

[Peter Jacobs]

The only chance we ever did have to influence the debate is to stand together, pigs might fly!

Pigs will definitely take to aerial maneuvers before I change my principles on maintaining the close season on our already very troubled rivers.

The Angling Trust would lose significant numbers if it were to embark on such a course, and as you say, in the end the EA would, in all probability, simply ignore them.

Then of course there are the myriad of other interested parties who seem to be in favor of keeping the status quo.

 

[stu_the_blank]

Pigs will definitely take to aerial maneuvers before I change my principles on maintaining the close season on our already very troubled rivers.

The Angling Trust would lose significant numbers if it were to embark on such a course, and as you say, in the end the EA would, in all probability, simply ignore them.

Then of course there are the myriad of other interested parties who seem to be in favor of keeping the status quo.

Peter,

If I'm correct and the proposal eventually comes from the EU, firstly, the decision will have been made before we get to hear about it.

Then, in the face of the political machine, your (and mine and anybody else's) principles will be trampled into the dirt. Individually, we don't exist.

Looking at how divided we are in our own back yard, what hope of a Europe wide angling consensus? Bob Hope at best.

The ATr won't propose a change, they are just flying a kite and frankly with only 17,000 paying members, they wouldn't lose 'significant' numbers if they did, because they aren't there to lose!

Anglers in total, 20 years ago there were over 3Million, now, 1Million? We are in serious decline, that is the status quo. Politicians count votes. We are small and divided which makes us easy to dismiss and ignore.

If you want to keep the current status quo, you'd better hope that your 'miriad of interested parties' have serious political clout. Very doutful. The EU is big business orientated and ultimately greenback, not green considerations will drive it.

At the moment, 'The Project' has more pressing problems to deal with, but when it gets back to straightening cucumbers, sizing fruit, slinging tons of dead small fish back into the sea (in the name of consevation) etc. don't assume that this is too trivial to matter to them.

I've never noticed a close season in France, is there one? What about Germany? Holland? I'd be interested if anybody knows. Harmonisation is a very powerful voice in Strasbourg, the UK will compromise, in the national interest of course.

Cling on to wishful thinking. If this thread has done anything other than showing that there is no 'Anglers View', it's shown that there is virtually no argument in favour of retention other than individual opposition to change of any kind and little in favour of abolition other than a desire to fish all year. No desire to examine any fact or data that might affect an opinion that is already set in stone, closed minds, no middle ground whatsoever. There is no debate, because nobody wants to.

We stand about as much chance as a snowman in hell. We will have no serious input to any decision. As always, we will bicker and moan on the sidelines.

Chap's and Chapesse's sorry about the rant, getting stir crazy as I won't be out again until my week in rural France in a fortnight!

Stu

 

[Ray Wood 1]

Just been looking up what goes on in some EU countries. Here’s a bit from Germany.

In Germany you can fish 12 months of the year, but you are not allowed to target a species of fish if it is in it’s reproductive time of year.

Catch and release is not allowed in Germany, you must kill and take all fish you catch unless:
i) It is too small.
ii) It is in it’s reproductive season.
iii) It is on the ‘Red List’ of protected species

We are already governed to much by the EU, what next if they get involved in our recreational fishing?hno:

Regards
Ray