Tired of being abused by know-it-alls

[no-one in particular]

Just about me being a "big bloke" that really came across wrong. What I really meant is that I am not tiny ****** that people would feel confident to take on, but definitely not that I am some 6'5" bodybuilder.

Marg what you said actually does make a lot of sense and we do struggle as a family here in UK by being "too nice" and obedient whilst majority of people arent. Even though we live here many years and my son is pretty much British I am still afraid should we do something maybe just a bit shady we will be looked at /handled differently.

That being said though, what I did with the fish was because I genuinely believe that the rule is there for a reason and I do want to make sure that life in UK waterways improves

That's the problem as a foreigner, you know if you do something wrong your going to be judged differently and that's why you probably over-learn the rules, but at least you have, you know them better than me but use your noddle a bit. Ive done the same when abroad, you think you have to be careful and try and please the natives. I think you just came a cropper with this Zander, little known law, bunch of yobs on hand with a few beers down them etc.
Try a well run commercial, usually someone there to sort out any trouble and yobs or bad behavior not allowed; they get thrown off and their rules displayed for all to see; you and your family will be nice and safe. Then you can just relax and enjoy the fishing without any hassle and you wont have to worry about killing any fish for whatever reason and wouldn't that just be better for you.

 

[no-one in particular]

I can't say for certain but a fair amount of Sturgeon, in the weight range of 8lb - 22lb, suddenly started to appear in the middle reaches of the Trent a coupe of years ago.

There was a rumour, and I've never had it substantiated, that there was at the time an EA crackdown on certain stillwater fisheries and once word got out some of those fisheries removed them and that's how they found their way into the river.

That in turn leads me to believe they need to be licenced but again it's only a circumstantial guess.

Oddly enough, after that initial flurry of fish and of which some are substantiated and witnessed, all seems to have gone quiet with few reports of any coming out recently that I've heard of.

Would they have migrated to the sea when big enough? Don't they spawn in the sea? not sure.

 

[thecrow]

As far as I can see ANY angler has a choice, learn the law and knock fish on the head knowing it might bring confrontation, ignore the law and risk a fine although the chances of getting caught are less than the chance of my hair growing back, fish where ALL fish are to be returned so removing the chance of having to make a choice about the first 2 choices.

 

[nottskev]

As far as I can see ANY angler has a choice, learn the law and knock fish on the head knowing it might bring confrontation, ignore the law and risk a fine although the chances of getting caught are less than the chance of my hair growing back, fish where ALL fish are to be returned so removing the chance of having to make a choice about the first 2 choices.

Well, unless you include game anglers in "any"angler..... As long as there are occasions/places where it's permitted to take a fish, and as far as I know, this will be circumscribed by details of size, number etc, is it really reasonable to say all anglers should avoid such occasions/places? We might well be in favour of returning all fish, but until that becomes the law, we ought to press to change the law rather than confront individuals who are acting legally.

Behind all this, is the issue of whether it's ever ok to take a fish for the pot. Personally, in general, I don't regard the fish I catch as food. Over a lifetime's fishing, I've had a few fish expire after capture, for whatever reason, and taken a handful of pike in circumstances where it was permitted, knowing that they would be cooked, eaten and appreciated. Everything else goes back, including all the accidental trout, and it's totally appropriate that that's overwhelmingly what we coarse anglers do. (Of course it exposes me to accusations that I'm sentimental about the ones I catch, but not the ones that I buy in Sainsbury's, but that's another matter!). But I don't feel I'm thereby entitled to insist nobody should ever take a fish in circumstances where they are allowed to do so and in accordance with the details set by the authority.

One good reason for "The Law" is that it stops us jumping on people who are only doing something we don't like.

 

[thecrow]

Well, unless you include game anglers in "any"angler..... As long as there are occasions/places where it's permitted to take a fish, and as far as I know, this will be circumscribed by details of size, number etc, is it really reasonable to say all anglers should avoid such occasions/places? We might well be in favour of returning all fish, but until that becomes the law, we ought to press to change the law rather than confront individuals who are acting legally.

No never said that Kev, I said that anglers have choices that they can make, what choice they make is entirely up to them, there are lots of laws that get broken everyday even by those that insist they know what the laws are such as it being illegal to be drunk in a public house.

There was recently a thread on here about canals where posts were made that some areas on canals may for different reasons not be safe, anglers that no longer fish these areas have made the choice not to fish there, we all make choices every time we go fishing where, how, bait when, e.t.c. all down to the individual and the choices they have available.

I have taken the odd Zander that has been deeply hooked and bleeding, I have eaten them and enjoyed them I could of course have put them back to die slowly but I made the choice not to do that.

PS the word I used was any not all.

 

[103841]

It Would have been interesting to read the content of this thread had the Zander been a Carp or similar. I'm not sure the drunks would have known the difference as would a lot of passers by that cannot recognise different species.

 

[thecrow]

It Would have been interesting to read the content of this thread had the Zander been a Carp or similar. I'm not sure the drunks would have known the difference as would a lot of passers by that cannot recognise different species.

It would also be interesting to know what other anglers would do while fishing a river if they saw another angler taking what they are legally allowed to take. Anyone?

 

[swizzle]

It would also be interesting to know what other anglers would do while fishing a river if they saw another angler taking what they are legally allowed to take. Anyone?

Prior to the shedding of light on the bye laws on Zander from the canal, I'd have been furious had I have witnessed the taking of the fish. As it is, I do not condone the taking of fish from a private water for the pot, or any other reason. If it is a free, public water and the fish falls with in the limits of rules stipulated I don't have a problem with fish being taken.

What I do have a problem with is the throw-away nature of some in society that believe it is okay to take fish of any size and number and it not have an impact on the water ways. In this respect, there are European citizens here that are guilty of this, yes. However there are also British citizens guilty of it. They may be fewer in number, but they exist all the same.

 

[thecrow]

If it is a free, public water and the fish falls with in the limits of rules stipulated I don't have a problem with fish being taken.

Taking this a little further, the river being fished has suffered a pollution and has been restocked with smaller fish, an angler fishing near to you decides that he will take 15 small barbel home each time he fishes ( up to 20 centimetres) still have no problem?

 

[swizzle]

In that scenrio I would be deeply unhappy. There are a myriad of situations we could conjure that we could disagree with. I believe that any responsible angler would react poorly to those circumstances. With a little more specificity, if the river in question is healthy then by the letter of the law it's allowed whether I agree with that law or not. I don't have to be happy with it. But realistically, my happiness will change nothing. I personally believe that taking fifteen fish of that size is far too much and immoral. But then I did say that I have a problem with the numbers taken.

 

[no-one in particular]

It would also be interesting to know what other anglers would do while fishing a river if they saw another angler taking what they are legally allowed to take. Anyone?

Personally I don't bother, I just go fishing to have a nice day and I wouldn't ruin it by worrying or reporting what anyone else does. If they are doing wrong then that's up to the them and the authorities to catch them. I am not saying that's right or a good thing, just the way I prefer it. I wouldn't like to see anyone taking fish from a river but what do you do, tell them to stop it, get punched or report it and spend an hour on the telephone giving all your details to some dimwit and having to wait for the authorities to turn up and then maybe its all for nothing because its legal and your just an ignorant prat. In the meantime what happened to my nice few hours on the river, gone down the swannee and life's just too short.

 

[thecrow]

In that scenrio I would be deeply unhappy. There are a myriad of situations we could conjure that we could disagree with. I believe that any responsible angler would react poorly to those circumstances. With a little more specificity, if the river in question is healthy then by the letter of the law it's allowed whether I agree with that law or not. I don't have to be happy with it. But realistically, my happiness will change nothing. I personally believe that taking fifteen fish of that size is far too much and immoral. But then I did say that I have a problem with the numbers taken.

I would like you be unhappy about this were this hypothetical situation to occur, what it does do imo is to highlight that the law as it stands is not always the best thing for the rivers it seeks to protect, choice is left to the angler and as you said "any responsible angler would react poorly".

 

[thecrow]

I wouldn't like to see anyone taking fish from a river but what do you do, tell them to stop it, get punched or report it and spend an hour on the telephone giving all your details to some dimwit and having to wait for the authorities to turn up and then maybe its all for nothing because its legal and your just an ignorant prat.

Like I said earlier its all down to what someone chooses to do, confrontation rarely solves anything, initiating confrontation is imo something to be avoided by making the correct choice within reason of course.

 

[old school]

Just a thought,I wonder what the police would say if you got stopped early in the morning on your way to the lake etc and you had a preist (to knock a fish on the head) a knife(to put a injured deer out of its misery )....................................................................................or maybe a gun,what would that be for then,in case you had to put a elephant out of its misery??:laugh:

 

[nottskev]

The hypothetical individual bent on taking a permitted "bag limit" of 15 recently stocked immature barbel is both an alarming and a highly improbable idea. It makes a point, but in the most "What if...." way.

Whilst I've never seen, and would bet a sum that I never will, such a sight, I do see, far too often, a fish-catcher, a recent coloniser of inland waters, that combs our waterways in large numbers extracting the fish that make up its half kilo per day fish diet........ And the law is heavily on its side. As was said, the law is not always protective of our rivers.

 

[nottskev]

Just a thought,I wonder what the police would say if you got stopped early in the morning on your way to the lake etc and you had a preist (to knock a fish on the head) a knife(to put a injured deer out of its misery )....................................................................................or maybe a gun,what would that be for then,in case you had to put a elephant out of its misery??:laugh:

If it was a Hardy priest - " A very elegant and stylish priest, as you would expect from Hardy. It weighs in at 100grams and has a hand tuned brass head with a satin chrome finish and the hardy logo engraved into it. " - then I'm guessing the policemen would tug his forelock and wish the owner a good day's clubbing, Sir.

 

[thecrow]

Just a thought,I wonder what the police would say if you got stopped early in the morning on your way to the lake etc and you had a preist (to knock a fish on the head) a knife(to put a injured deer out of its misery )....................................................................................or maybe a gun,what would that be for then,in case you had to put a elephant out of its misery??:laugh:

I was stopped one morning by the police because he said my driving was erratic, it was as I was driving round potholes, I pointed this out to him and also that I noticed in my mirror that he didn't avoid them I saw his vehicle bouncing over them, he breathalysed me none the less which was of course negative as I don't drink, perhaps he had nothing better to do that morning?

 

[tomino2112]

Lot of you (or some of you but often?) have suggested that people should just stop fishing where they want and go to some fishery and such. I dont think thats a good solution, for me personally I dislike commercial fisheries. The only one I ever go is Bury Hill and that is only because its just a beautiful surrounding and I go there to turn off. Other than that I prefer less fabricated approach to fishing eg canals, rivers and the sea.

Is really the only solution to this for me to spend time somewhere I do not enjoy being?

Granted, the encounter I have described here was a one-off and most probably not going to happen again. The Zander in question was my second Zander ever, first from "natural" water and it was a big surprise to me that there actually was any. I also realise that not always there will be people lurking around corner looking for trouble.

One thing I find quite interesting with Birtish feelings against taking fish is that I regularly see fisherman (90% of time British) fishing for pike who target first smaller species such as rudd, minnow and bream, then hook them back alive(!) and thats how there are targeting pike. How cruel is that? What is you lot view on that?

 

[sam vimes]

One thing I find quite interesting with Birtish feelings against taking fish is that I regularly see fisherman (90% of time British) fishing for pike who target first smaller species such as rudd, minnow and bream, then hook them back alive(!) and thats how there are targeting pike. How cruel is that? What is you lot view on that?

Life's full of contradictions and outright hypocrisies. The very same angler would probably have a ****y fit if someone further down the bank placed the same type and number of fish into a plastic bag to take home. However, my view is that it's one of the big reasons as to why I haven't fished for predators for many years. I'm not comfortable with live baiting and don't like the idea of removing any coarse fish from a water, to use as bait, or any other reason.

 

[David Gane]

Speaking as a keen pike angler Tomino I don't livebait precisely because I do find it cruel. A lot of people feel the same way.

I think that most of this debate would be resolved if you just accepted that, whatever you think and may be used to, British thinking on killing coarse fish is largely against it. You can be forgiven for not knowing that when you first came to the country, but now you do know all you have to do is agree that you will adopt local customs. Or, as we say, "when in Rome, do as the Romans do". It is the fact that you continue to argue another point of view (in such a provocative way) that gets people upset.

If you were just to do this you must be able to see from a good number of the contributions to this thread that you would feel a great deal more welcome. There would be no need to fish somewhere else and no need to feel unwelcome because of where you come from. After all, even the so-called drunken yobs who challenged you noticed you because of your behaviour, not your accent.

If you aren't willing to adapt to your new home, then I suggest that the problem IS you, not others. After all, there is a time for standing up for what you believe in, but there is also a time for holding up one's hands and saying, yes OK I take your point.