The Licence Fee… Keep, Modify, Abolish?

[John Bailey]

I am not here to praise Fishing Breaks or suggest that you book a day on a chalk stream with them, but I note that they are hosting a potentially interesting Zoom call on the subject of the licence fee at 6.00pm on November 22nd. This, I suggest, should be an evening of interest for us all, wherever or for whatever we fish. The crux is not just about some money we are required to pay annually, but in reality about where our fishing goes in the future.

I have history. In the 1980s my fishing partner, Roger Miller, and I were so disgusted with the way Norfolk waters were abused we refused to pay our licence fees – and advertised the fact, daring the authorities to take us to court so we could explain our actions and motivations. They never did!

We have many independent organisations working for fishery improvement. Should they get our money?​

From the mid 1990s, the then new Environment Agency seemed to offer far more promise than the agencies that had preceded it, but that hope swiftly disappeared. Whilst I know and like and respect many individuals within the EA fishery departments, the organisation as a whole, I believe, is a useless behemoth. It is crucified by dogma and by data collecting.

I have three close friends who work loosely within Government. They say the waste of public money at the MoD, Highways and Transport in general is eye-watering. I believe from years of observation that the same is true at the EA. Most of what we do pay is squandered for few if any obvious results. Even simple, straightforward bailiffing is cut to the core. But are there alternatives?

The Angling Trust has an excellent initiative… should it focus on conservation?​

I really do not know, but certainly other comparable countries do better at fishery conservation than us so there must be answers. (I am trying to understand how river management works in Slovenia, Austria, Denmark and Germany btw, and will let you know how I get on.) I think it is well accepted that we need a Water Watchdog with real teeth, rather than the slobbering old hound that is the EA.

I think the Angling Trust has a real role and I think the new line-up is strong. I’d like Fish Legal given greater priority than it seems to get – after all, the old Anglers’ Conservation Association was the beating heart of the organisation for generations. I’d personally like to see the AT work almost exclusively on conservation and political lobbying, rather than diluting their energies elsewhere.

Should our money fund private projects of proven worth?​

I think, sadly, money talks. As an OAP, I pay around 8p per day for my licence fee. Pay peanuts etc etc! What does a Chelsea ticket holder pay to watch 19 Premiership games? What does a golfer at a good club pay in the course of a year? A few years ago, I was a member of a syndicate on the Avon. There were a hundred of us paying getting close to a grand each. The miles of river and carrier were looked after immaculately, the gravels were cleaned, the weed was cared for, predation was controlled, poaching was non-existent, and judicious stocking policies could be afforded. We could fish 365 days a year for trout or coarse fish in near Paradise.

I am NOT saying I have all, or any, of the answers, but hats off to Fishing Breaks for giving us the chance to come up with solutions better than mine. We sure do need them!

The Test… wonderful fishing in glorious surroundings… you get what you pay for!​

The post 'The Licence Fee... Keep, Modify, Abolish?' first appeared in Fishing Magic Magazine.

Continue reading...

 

[mikench]

If the licence fee was hypothecated, increased to more accurately reflect the costs of maintaining rivers and lakes with their diverse fish stocks and if the licence was enforced with heavy fines for those fishing without then I'm all in favour of its retention. If however it continues to go into a pit of waste, financial abuse, croneyism, negligent procurement and so on then it should be abolished. At the moment it's just another example of poor government profligacy with our money taken from us on the pretext it's for the maintenance of waterways and the preservation of fish stocks and then blown on follies like HS2, noisy tanks and crappy ppe.

 

[Peter Jacobs]

(Note: Moderator cap OFF, hence personal comments)

The licence fee is pefectly okay as it currenty is having just been revised in content and increased in prices.

Personally, I see this as a thinly veiled attempt by the ATr to carve off yet another slice of the licence fee which seems to be behind the constant sniping at the EA. . . . . How much of the fee is now sent to the Trust, one million three hundred and fifty thousand anually until 2023?

Is the EA perfect?
No, of course not but it is a far sight more ably staffed to combat what ails Angling than a collection of (albeit well meaning) amateurs . . . . .

I well remember the debates on here when the Trust was being proposed and the fact that most of us were against the conjoining of the ACA with the embryonic Trust as it seems the only reason for so doing being the existing Charity status of the ACA . . .

 

[bullet]

It's just an outdated Tax, imo, like the Dog License, and I really don't see any benefit from it, particularly as I cough up for the Salmon and Sea Trout one and all those two species do is decline in numbers, so I really don't know what the extra cash is going on.
As I've said before, if Anglers need a license, why not Kayakers, wild swimmers paddleboarders etc?

 

[Molehill]

I am aprox in line with bullet above, I see no justification (in these times) for separate game and coarse licences, the EA or NRW are meant to be looking after water quality and the river environment, why on earth should anybody pay more or less to fish for different species in the same river. Or any river, fish are fish.

I don't object to paying a licence if it produces some benefit, but feel we should be moving towards a "national river users" licence of some kind that encompasses all other river sports and we would have the weight of numbers behind us then to demand improvements. Canoes, paddle boards, swimmers, rowers are not going away so let's use them and not abuse them.

We all want to see baliffs on the water, but it has always struck me as a waste of my licence fee to have it spent on paying someone checking my licence. Targeted enforcement is another matter. There has to be a better way, whenever a club membership is renewed it should only be with a current licence ( and expiry dates flagged during the year), every visit to a commercial should start with showing current licence. I'm sure there is more and technology should be used, not paying a baliffs to wander the banks, I would prefer them to be ready to act when needed. If we come across a poacher then a baliffs responds.

Just a few thoughts of mine, but I think we are getting a rough deal for the money at present.

 

[steve2]

I have often wondered what would happen if we all refused to buy a licence. Would it really make much if any difference to the waters we fish.
Most of us know that they don't do anything for the waterways in this country.
The last work carried out on our clubs river section was paid for by the club. We were told that any work carried must not increase flood risk, when asked would they over see the work we were told there were staff available.

I do agree that now should be water users licence covering all users not just anglers and a the few boaters that pay.

 

[fishface1]

How is my rod licence money used to help fishing?

With restrictions easing and months of milder weather ahead it promises to be an exciting time for fishing! In simple terms, the big increase in fishing licence sales over the last year or so also …

www.google.co.uk

Believe it, or don’t believe it.

Up to you.

 

[LPP]

An agency that allows so much sewage to be dumped in our rivers - and I've seen detailed caringly prepared reports on my local river Wey - really do not deserve my salmon rod licence fee.

I'm fed up to the teeth with the EA and the poor government attitude towards them. (some hope recently of course, but effective?)

Are the Angling Trust perfect? I don't think so but quite a few streets ahead of the EA.