Putting the case for angling
So Jon Lakin (Mailbox, January 29) wants angling made unlawful except for consumption, does he?
The content of his letter suggests he knows absolutely nothing about the sport, but presumes to tell the million-plus participants what they should and should not do. It is difficult to know where to begin to counter his assertions but here goes.
1. He talks about only the rich and privileged enjoying their game sport, but then goes on to talk about everyone being allowed to kill and eat fish. He obviously does not understand that these people are killing coarse and not game fish. The rich have never done this.
2. Responsible anglers are paying £20 million-plus in licence fees each year to the Environment Agency to help sustain and improve our waterways and many more millions on restocking out of club fees.
They also act as watchdogs regarding the health of waters. Many of the people killing fish pay nothing and do not look after the environment at all.
3. The sport is such that it enables countless pensioners to take part, and up and down the country the police and other organisations are using angling to take many troubled youngsters off the streets.
4. Mr Lakin also has no concept of what happens when these people are allowed to take fish to eat. Most, if not all, are East Europeans and I can assure him that in their own countries restocking has to take place on a regular basis to counter the fact that anglers kill everything they catch. Indeed in Bulgaria this year there were proposals on the table (subsequently watered down) to ban all fishing for a year as fish stocks had become dangerously low.
5. Finally, if Mr Lakin's proposals were allowed, would he be prepared to contribute his share of the many millions of pounds needed to replenish stocks each year or, if not, would he be prepared to see the decline of all the other wildlife that depend on healthy fish stocks to survive, such as kingfishers, herons and otters? I think not.
Alan Smith, Secretary Broome Angling Society (an ardent and proud angler).







11 Comments
View all
by Richard, Leicester
Saturday, February 12 2011, 11:06AM
“Just passing time really while the soaps are on, but arguing for the sake of it can be a bit addictive! As mentioned I don,t go fishing but did as a child did on occasion. It may not surprise you to hear that my dad stopped taking me after one too many tantrums after not catching anything. In terms of your question though, no anglers do not just sit and hold a rod, why would they? There is in fact a endless choice of techniques available to them in order to catch fish. This is where the competitive feelings come in causing someone to enjoy what they are doing. Once a fish takes the bait the line must be struck quickly so the fish doesn't swallow the hook. This is where the pain/injury debate comes in. I cannot possibly comment on how a fish must feel, to compensate for the unknown people often default to crediting fish with human attributes. In terms of memory, emotion and pain I just don't know. However I would suggest that because the flesh around a fishs mouth is so thin pain would be minimal. To then throw a fish back would be poor practice, particulary if the fish had been tired while being caught. The thing is a responsible angler will put caught fish back non the worse for the experience. This same person will have contributed financially so helping to sustain jobs etc. These people also care for our environment so would discourage vandalism, littering and irresponsible fishing which I expect is a big problem. Based on my understanding of the benefits I feel obliged to disagree with anyone who would see fishing banned because baby fish might start crying if daddy fish is taken away by the big mean fisherman.”
by dawn, leicester
Saturday, February 12 2011, 9:41AM
“Richard, you really are letting myself and Arden have it with both barrels aren't you? I'm not sure which part of which post of mine could fairly be called 'ill informed spoutings', do anglers sit holding a rod to catch a fish and then throw it back or don't they?
Also not sure why you would consider me arrogant, although I must admit to having a magnet on my 'fridge which states: 'everyone is entitled to my opinion'.”
by Richard, Leicester
Thursday, February 10 2011, 7:57PM
“Arden, the fact that you need to split hairs over a statement that clearly correlates with the topic being discussed shows how weak your argument is. Plus on the evidence of your original comment your thought process is abstract to say the least, makes me wonder if you can't really help it hence getting all emotional over fish and not recognising that the benefits of responsible fishing outweigh such juvenile concerns”
by Arden, Braunstone
Wednesday, February 09 2011, 10:22PM
“Richard, I never mentioned injury, I mentioned pain. Do please read what people post.
To explain the difference is clearly necessary to someone like you. Pain can be experienced without injury, same with humans as well”
by Richard, Leicester
Wednesday, February 09 2011, 6:25PM
“Dawn, whatever your point of view you still display the arrogance of someone who thinks that their singular ideology should be accepted by everyone, hence the ill informed spoutings you choose to share about a pastime and sport that is not to your liking. Arden if you can't see the difference between humans, cats, dogs and fish then good luck to you. I know enough about fishing to know that if done properly no harm needs to occur, the fact that people are different means that the effects of having a hook in our mouths would cause injury. That's because Arden we are not the same.”
by dawn, leicester
Wednesday, February 09 2011, 12:06PM
“Two follow up observations, firstly David, I believe the definitions of pastime and sport are at great variance, surely sport implies an element of competitiveness, fat chance for the fish! Also, Richard, please don't worry for me, apart from the obvious light heartedness of my comment re watching paint dry, I did state it was in preference to fishing, not any other pastime!”
by Arden, Braunstone
Wednesday, February 09 2011, 11:44AM
“So animals don't feel pain then, Richard? Certain are you? What type of animal then deserves consideration as a human would? A dog or cat perhaps”
by Richard, Leicester
Tuesday, February 08 2011, 10:15PM
“Dawn my dear, if millions of people like to fish then your deliberately negative summary is clearly not the reality. I don't fish but if watching paint drying is preferable to you than actually doing something then I worry for you. Also meat lover, these are fish for crying out loud, attributing human feelings to animals is a bit GCSE to say the least. animals”
by Meat Lover, Glenfield
Tuesday, February 08 2011, 9:56PM
“How would you like a barb in your throat, not as if you are going to be eaten”
by David, Great Easton, Rural Leicestershire.
Tuesday, February 08 2011, 10:14AM
“Well, each to their own, dawn. Some folk think football is just kicking a piece of leather about and other view rugby as egg chasing!!
They are all a pastime and can easily be considered a "sport", that is not unreasonable.”