The Alternative Angler – Fishing, is it Worth it?

Never mind smelling the flowers, don’t forget to take time out to see the satirical side of fishing life and grab a laugh along the way as well. So here’s a regular column from Kevin Perkins to remind us that life is for laughing at, or taking the p*** out of, whenever we can.

Do I want to go on Fishing?

Firstly, there is the time factor; I just don’t get out on the banks anywhere near as often as I used to. We all lead busy lives, but juggling free time gets more difficult as time goes on. I will admit that some of those constraints are self-inflicted, becoming a local councillor was one, taking up cricket was another and the decorating, lawn mowing and car washing are always in there somewhere.

But why put all your gear on eBay and turn your back on fishing, you ask?

The reason is because at the moment, I can.

In time to come, I fear we won’t have that option, because the sport just won’t be there. This will be brought about by a gradual, almost insidious erosion of ability to use certain tackle and methods due to legislation imposed from forces outside of the sport brought in to ‘protect’ the welfare of fish to the complete detriment of anglers.

Compulsory barbless hooks will be first, no doubt. This will soon be followed by a complete ban on keepnets or any kind of fish retention systems: match fishermen – hard luck! The wrangling about the use of livebaits will gather pace, especially when the debate is widened to try and define just what constitutes ‘live’ bait. Expect the use of living creatures such as worms and maggots to come under close scrutiny, and don’t think you can get away with using pellets and boilies, because the contents of such baits will have to proven to be not harmful to fish in any way.

This will mean the end of homemade baits, and any shop-bought items will have to pass strict environmental impact surveys before being sold. Those tests will not only refer to what effect the baits have on the fish, but will also focus on the constituent parts. For instance, whether or not those ingredients come from sustainable sources, and as an example, trawling the ocean floor for halibut to grind up for use in barbel pellets might come into question.

Rafts of new legislation will be handed down, and anglers will just lie back and take it as they always have done. Remember the lead poisoning of swans? It had to be careless anglers dropping shot, so let’s ban that. All those nice people with shotguns can go on discharging tons of lead over the countryside for years. Cormorants eating your fish stocks? Leave the poor things alone; it’s all our fault for over-fishing the oceans and driving them inland. Now, if it was a dog worrying a farmer’s sheep, and thereby threatening his livelihood, he wouldn’t have to fill out quotas and permission slips before taking aim with his Purdey.

Coarse fish stocks being taken and eaten by Eastern Europeans, well that’s not really a police matter, is it? And when the next 600,000 join the EU and head straight for our shores, it will soon become custom and practice, so don’t expect any legislation to stop it any time soon. Speaking of non-police matters, being targeted by animal right activists is not on any list of ‘points’ that our beloved bobbies can earn, so no incentive to act there, then. Of course, if you want to attract the attention of the boys in blue, just slip a baseball bat in your quiver for protection reasons, you should expect a least one night in the cells for carrying an offensive weapon, before being bailed to appear.

Am I right to think the future is all doom and gloom and the best action is to get out while the going is good? Well, I’m afraid that the answer is yes.

Anglers as individuals and groups have in the past, and will continue in the future, to have absolutely no balls whatsoever. We must be the biggest oppressed majority there ever was, the softest of soft targets. As a prime example of that we are daft/stupid enough to pay an additional tax in the shape of a Rod Licence on top of day tickets/subscriptions before we can begin to fish. Why is that?

I don’t have to pay a ‘Bat Licence’ before I play cricket, I don’t see golfers being apprehended for a ‘Club Licence’ before they get on the greens, which is probably just as well if they had to buy a licence for every two clubs, as they can have up to fourteen in their bags. Footballers don’t buy Boot Licences; tennis players are exempt from Racquet Licences, etc, etc, for just about every other sport you care to mention.

I accept none of these are water users, but the majority are using municipal courses and pitches, paid for out of yours and my Community Charges. Perhaps we should ask why our sport is not funded from central/local government, like so many others.

If we look at water users, why aren’t there Licences issued for Windsurfers, Scuba Divers, Water Skiers, Bird Watchers, Model Boat Enthusiasts, and ‘People who throw sticks in the lake for their dog to fetch’ who must need licensing, surely? No, just anglers, apparently. So are we subsidising all these other groups, or is our money just the cream off the top? My jaundiced view of the EA is perhaps not helped by the response I got from them when asking about volunteer bailiffs to help with licence checking duties.

The feeling I got was that licence-paying individuals like me had no right to question the level of enforcement or, in my view, often the complete lack of. I got as high as I could up the chain of command at the EA until finally my comments were passed to ‘someone who could deal with all the issues I had raised’, including my offer to work for nothing as a volunteer, ring-fencing a £ 3 increase in licence fees specifically to fund enforcement, and other preposterous ideas. That person with the answers hasn’t given me an answer – yet. Somehow I just know that is the answer.