That’ll cause some trouble when the big-guns come on here tonight~think

So am i right in thinking that we,ve got to pay an extra 20 quid to enter fisho AND an extra quid on the licences so you can fish anyway. which is all going to the snidey angling trust. Who,s haveing a wage rise is my question.

I think £2 on the licence fee should be applied and scap the £20 fee ….. Everyone gets the licence, and no one would really feel the extra £2. But would benifit from a well funded angling trust

Personally I was not to happy to have to join angling trust at a fee of £20 to support the minority within our sport who don’t want to pay anything to sustain what is a very important aspect of my life and lifestyle.

However that said I have joined because I want to fish the Fishomania qualifiers but when all of this kicked off I recommended on this forum and several others that I thought it was unfair that that we shouold have to fork out £20 for the benefit of our sport when it would be far mor sensible to add a minimum levy to the license fee which would both suport the EA and AT.

At the time I mentioned a £1 levy which would to all not have been to much to pay. Following my comments I recieved a fair amount of criticism but it was the only way that i felt that the sport could move forward and be protected at the same time.

I also recommended that Sea Anglers should also have to purchase a licence. After all anything that enters the rivers is distributed into the sea. If we are protecting the inshore waters we are also protecting the coastal waters so on that point why should sea anglers receive all the benefits gained by the cost and efforts of the inland anglers for free.

Basically my point was that if you fish you should pay for the priveledge and for the efforts to sustain the sport as we know it.

Regardless of which branch you persue you should require a license, at the same time you shouls also support the sport.

If a £1 or even £2 is added to the license fee if it moves the sport forward while maintaining the interests and well being of the sport I have no complaints.

12th of november geepster quoted in Q/A,s forum that you,d have to pay angling trust 20 quid to take bait to your peg, as a joke maybe but how close to the truth is it getting.

Just to let anglers know, the story in the EDP is complete bollocks. I think Swimfeeder might be able to tell you how reliable a source of info the person who wrote it is!

IF it’s true it will save me £25 on buying a licence until there’s been some sort of legal challenge.

The report states that AT membership peaked at 12,000, does this suggest it is now declining?

I will contact Mark Lloyd the CEO of the Angling Trust, and alert him to this latest “effort” from a so called angling journalist, please do not take the article seriously, this angling “journalist” has a bit of history, shall we just say, he has been in hot water before for his “articles”.

I am also slightly aggreived by having to join the A/Trust just to fish the fisho qualifiers,and thats even if i am one of the lucky anglers to be picked via the random draw!

I wish i had put a bit more thought into it now,because if i would of waited until a couple of days before the fisho draw to join th A/Trust,then i could see how many fisho tickets i get.
If i didnt get any i could cancel my A/Trust membership and get a re-fund,because i think you get 7 days to cancel.
As Homer say`s “DOH!”

I hate to say it but £20 paid as a pre-requisite to gain Fisho tickets or £2 on a licence, either way it is nothing for the security of your sport!!! It really does boggle me how people can moan about AT been sneeky or all the harshness involved in having to pay to get into a draw for tickets ………

Please be reallistic people it is nothing to ask every angler for £2 on a licence (to be honest I think that is the best way) which allows you to fish every day of the year!!! Its less than a pint and less than a penny a day. It really is nothing and our licence is cheap anyway!!!

Give the AT a break they are trying to become established for us as a whole not to fleece us all. If that is the case in time then I am sure we can fight against it then? Just give them a bloody chance with a bit of money behind them to promote and protect our interests and see what we can do as a collective!!

I’d rather give up fishing.

Just how low will the AT go to get anglers to join 1st Fisho now this what next you will have to join the AT to buy a rod or Pole or fish your local commie, this is a disgrace. The AT is in trouble because it doesn’t know its arse from it’s elbow end of.

Is it in some way connected with the Labour Party?

@caster rob wrote:

Is it in some way connected with the Labour Party?

Only in that once elected it doesn’t listen to its members or the people that it is supposed to represent Rob

Whilst on the subject of newspaper articles,, the story in the link below caught my eye in my local paper.

http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/news/Bristol-MP-pledges-support-animal-protection/article-1730358-detail/article.html

Vote Cruelty Free is a new non-partisan, coalition of non-governmental organisations working together to ensure the political process reflects public concern for animal protection.

Its members are the BUAV, Compassion in World Farming, IFAW in Action, League Against Cruel Sports and Respect for Animals. Vote Cruelty Free covers a broad range of animal welfare issues including wild and marine animals, animal experimentation, cruel sports, the fur trade and farming.

Vote Cruelty Free believes that bringing the animal protection movement together and working directly with candidates and elected officials is an effective way to achieve positive change for animals in the political arena.

http://votecrueltyfree.org/

Seems like quite a few MP’s and prospective candidates from all parties have already pledged their support.

Fishing is not one of their targets at moment but I won’t be surprised if it does become one. Nor would I be surprised to see PETA join the coalition.

Anyone who does not believe that fishing is under threat is deluding themselves and those who think that angling can survive without a strong representative body to defend it are deluding themselves even more.

Fish Fearme for a start I would have mentioned the name of this ‘leaked report’, said what it was about and quoted it directly, would have taken a picture aswell and published it. (A prime example of this was a statement regarding pellet price increases this year from a well known bait producer which found its way to us and was immediately printed).

But Roy Webster does none of the above which leads us to believe this is a story manufactured from a rumour. He usually gets most of his stories from A Times and actually used to lift the text and quotes directly with no credit to our paper… until his editor got a few choice emails. We have a lot of close contacts at the Trust and were the first publication to report on its formation. This £1 on the licence business isn’t in the pipeline at the moment…if it was you would have heard about it but the way Roy writes you’d think it was happening tomorrow!

Hardly anything is kept ‘hush hush’ in angling -I’ve upset a few advertisers/people in the trade over the years because I’ve put my job first and not kept things quiet when I’ve heard them.

I would quite happily pay an extra £2 on a licence what IMO is good value for money and means all is taking care of in one transaction.

I percieve Angling Trust Membership like an insurance policy, you may begrudge paying it and in the short term you may not see what they have to offer but situations may arise when you need there help and membership will be worth much more than it cost.

J