Opinion Piece – Anti-Anglers

Opinion Piece – Anti-anglers

This is not entirely true, they will not be satisfied at all for then they will move onto something else, another field sport. You see, although they are anti-hunting, anti-fishing, anti-gerty, or whatever, they too are hunters and you and your sport are their quarry. The chase to rid the country of anglers is what fires their motivation and when they win a sanction or privilege, it’s a form of blood-letting for them in much the same way as it is said that fox hunters were marked with their first kill.

But don’t let us get sidetracked from angling. It’s this pandering to the antis I want to address.

For example, in the recent debate on the closed season it was said again, twice if not more times, I didn’t read every comment thoroughly, life’s too short. Do you really believe that if we reinstated the close season completely (this is an example) that the antis would say “Well done, anglers, how very caring of you. For that we will let you fish in peace and never again trouble you?” If you believe they would then you are living in cloud cuckoo land. You show them respect, they give you even more trouble.

They will take that as a minor victory and that will only strengthen their will to continue making life hell for you and I on the bank. So what do you concede next? Ban keepnets (maybe you don’t use them, but many do and they are legal) and then what? Barbed hooks, and then what?

The list goes on until we reach a point as in Germany where catching and releasing a fish is considered entertainment for the angler when he should really be fishing for food. Well, just as in Germany, it may then become law that every fish you catch including that personal best 14lbs 5ozs barbel will have to be killed. I don’t think there’s an angler on here that would want to see that state of affairs reached, so why give these people any influence at all?

You and I know that a great many of the fish in our rivers and lakes are there because we put them there or because we cared so much we beat off the polluters and made the rivers clean and fit for fish to live in again. How long would that last if the antis had their way? When did you last see an anti-angler campaign for the cleaning of a river or for research to assess the stocks of fish in a lake or simply help out on a clean-up party?

Hmmmmm! I can guess the answers, you don’t need to post, but there might be one some time ago, I accept that.

The brutal truth of the matter is, that if we (anglers, the ACA as was, and the EA) didn’t look after the fishes in our waters, no one would. The brutal truth is that for most of the public, and that includes ALL anti-anglers, providing the surface of a water looks good they just couldn’t give a toss what’s happening below. Ponds silted up and filled with shopping trolleys and old bikes, rivers polluted and carrying their stinking effluent towards the sea and no one could care less so long as they “looked” pretty on top.

I can only go back to my younger days in Stalybridge where the Tame flowed pure black and it had only run a few miles at that. Not a single fish lived in it – at all. Now, it carries trout and other coarse fish as do all the tributaries to the Mersey and even the Mersey is clean enough to fish. Be honest, would that have happened were it not for the sport of angling? I very much doubt it.

I have no wish whatsoever to shoot a pheasant or partridge out of the sky. I like watching them in our woods, on my way to work and even whilst driving for my work, beautiful things that I wouldn’t want to harm in any way such that I brake to avoid hitting them (I know the law says I shouldn’t) and so far (touch wood) I haven’t hurt one yet. Do I want to see the shooting of these birds banned?

NO!

That is the emphatic answer I would give because I know that were it not for the sport of shooting, these birds wouldn’t be here at all. In our area a couple of years ago I heard that 6000 pheasants had been released and less than 2000 of them were accounted for by shooting. A large number are killed by vehicles, as witnessed by the volume of carcases on the roadside in the mornings, and foxes and your average moggies must account for a number too, but around half (so it was reckoned) escaped to other areas or lived out a happy and fulfilling life (we hope).

Why can’t people live and let live? By attacking an established “field sport” (OK some may not have liked fox or deer hunting) all you do is take away some of the protections that those sportsmen give to the animals and birds (or fish in our case) they hunt. In some cases such as shooting, the woodland itself benefits because areas are created that are bird-friendly and scrub and deadwood cleared or re-sited in order to create feeding areas, protection and access to look after the birds. Just like with us, we want fish and if the river is cleaned of debris and well managed, it makes a nice habitat for the fish.

So, my message is – let’s stop pandering to these antis, you are never going to win them over as long as you have a hole in your ozone. Just get on with fishing, enjoy it, look after your fish as best you can and stuff the anti-anglers.