Wild Justice?

[greencard1]

Wild Justice are making a legal fuss about the release of 'non native' pheasant and partridge by game shoots.
Meanwhile they protect 'non native' sinensis cormorants, that are doing untold damage to UK freshwater fish stocks.
'Untold', because no media will touch the subject due to Packham's high profile.

[John Milford]

Wild Justice are making a legal fuss about the release of 'non native' pheasant and partridge by game shoots.
Meanwhile they protect 'non native' sinensis cormorants, that are doing untold damage to UK freshwater fish stocks.
'Untold', because no media will touch the subject due to Packham's high profile.

The only conclusion can be that they are more interested in waging some kind of perceived 'class war' than they are in the natural environment.

Sounds like another 'Trojan Horse' full of shouty lefties who have become very clever at devising what they see as 'usassailable' causes of convenience.

They know that the media will be either complicit or simply too afraid to criticise anything that hijacks the ecology, veganism, race or sexuality to hide its real agenda.

[davelumb]

Wild Justice is against killing animals. They use the ecological argument as a cover. Packham is their figurehead. The brains and ideologues behind the organisation are Mark Avery and Ruth Tingay. They are the cultural, not class, warriors.

https://wildjustice.org.uk/about/

[John Milford]

The lines between 'culture' and politics are easily blurred.

No doubt they'll be turning their attention to angling in due course?

[davelumb]

The lines between 'culture' and politics are easily blurred.

No doubt they'll be turning their attention to angling in due course?

I imagine they see shooting as something the public can be more easily swayed to back a ban on. All those corpses of fluffy birds, all that killing of predators to protect the target species.

Then it'll be angling.

[John Milford]

The lines between 'culture' and politics are easily blurred.

No doubt they'll be turning their attention to angling in due course?

I imagine they see shooting as something the public can be more easily swayed to back a ban on. All those corpses of fluffy birds, all that killing of predators to protect the target species.

Then it'll be angling.

With regard to the birds of prey, I'm with WJ on that (only that). Killing raptors to 'protect' game birds is no different to killing pike to 'protect' trout.

If the shooting estates were smart, they'd realise that they could remove one of the most emotive 'anti' arguments by accepting that predation is inevitable and simply living with it. If they were really smart they could even turn it to their advantage.

[greencard1]

Where do you stand on killing cormorants to protect freshwater fish?

It is scary to hear that you guys think that WJ will eventually go after angling. What defence have we got?

[davelumb]

The lines between 'culture' and politics are easily blurred.

No doubt they'll be turning their attention to angling in due course?

I imagine they see shooting as something the public can be more easily swayed to back a ban on. All those corpses of fluffy birds, all that killing of predators to protect the target species.

Then it'll be angling.

With regard to the birds of prey, I'm with WJ on that (only that). Killing raptors to 'protect' game birds is no different to killing pike to 'protect' trout.

If the shooting estates were smart, they'd realise that they could remove one of the most emotive 'anti' arguments by accepting that predation is inevitable and simply living with it. If they were really smart they could even turn it to their advantage.

Two problems there. There would be shoots (you've fallen into the class war trap - not all managed shoots are run by estates, smaller ones are run by individuals who rent sporting rights) which carried on killing predators. Even if predator control ended tomorrow Wild Justice et al wouldn't believe it.

[Mike J]

The lines between 'culture' and politics are easily blurred.

No doubt they'll be turning their attention to angling in due course?

I imagine they see shooting as something the public can be more easily swayed to back a ban on. All those corpses of fluffy birds, all that killing of predators to protect the target species.

Then it'll be angling.

With regard to the birds of prey, I'm with WJ on that (only that). Killing raptors to 'protect' game birds is no different to killing pike to 'protect' trout.

If the shooting estates were smart, they'd realise that they could remove one of the most emotive 'anti' arguments by accepting that predation is inevitable and simply living with it. If they were really smart they could even turn it to their advantage.

The days of the big pheasant bags will slowly dwindle, with the sport returning to shooting wild bred birds only.
I also cannot see grouse shooting and its absentee ownership withstanding a Labour Government that will be elected by the younger majority townie, generations.
Labour under Blair eliminated hunting with dogs and dispite numberous opportunities nothing has ever been done by the Conservatives to revoke the Law.

But what nobody can ignore is that Nature Conservation has to sometimes come from the barrel of a gun!!

.

[greencard1]

Didn't Tony Blair's government have an 'Angling Tsar'?

Why doesn't the Tory government?

[Mike J]

The lines between 'culture' and politics are easily blurred.

No doubt they'll be turning their attention to angling in due course?

They have already had a stab at angling John.
I posted a link about it sometime ago.

Posh hair do lives in my county and is persona non grata throughout.

.

[greencard1]

Who is going to be Angling's Packham?
Chris Tarrant? Matthew Wright? Roger Daltry? Ian Botham?
It is a shame we lost John Wilson.

I propose John Milford.

[Mike J]

Who is going to be Angling's Packham?
Chris Tarrant? Matthew Wright? Roger Daltry? Ian Botham?
It is a shame we lost John Wilson.

I propose John Milford.

We do not need to defend something that does not need defending.
Our sport is a huge positive in the countryside and the country, we persue it on private land and pay freely for the privilege, we instigate species protection, keep millions in jobs, and cause no pain or distress to what we catch.

Posh hair's attack on shooting led to his immediate exclusion from County shows and many landowners wont have him step on their land, while previously even his County Wildlife Trust had rejected him as their President.
Without the BBC he wouldn't even have a platform.

.

[Duncan Holmes]

Who is going to be Angling's Packham?
Chris Tarrant? Matthew Wright? Roger Daltry? Ian Botham?
It is a shame we lost John Wilson.

I propose John Milford.

There will never be a "Anglers Packham", we are far to busy criticizing each other for the type of bait/hook/line/species/clothing/etc that we choose.

Let alone agree who would be our flag bearer, s**t, the majority of us wont support the National Body because we don't agree with a single minor policy or we think match angling gets too much representation or some other b******s. We look for reasons why they don't represent "me" rather than bigger picture.

Angling is setting itself up to fail and it will go from biggest participant sport to history because of apathy, fiscal tightness and one up man ship.

If WJ really turned on us now we would be practically defenceless, pretty poor place for a £1bn industry to be positioned.

PS, John would get my vote

[greencard1]

I fear you are right Duncan.

[Mike J]

If we were an easy target they or similar would have tried already.
What they all know is that you do not kick a sleeping giant.

Something as simple as controlling equine activity in one National Park, the same that CP resides, led to severe face-to-face confrontations and threats to burn down houses, followed by dismissals and a return to normal service, with nothing being tried since.

.

[Stewlaws]

If we were an easy target they or similar would have tried already.
What they all know is that you do not kick a sleeping giant.

Something as simple as controlling equine activity in one National Park, the same that CP resides, led to severe face-to-face confrontations and threats to burn down houses, followed by dismissals and a return to normal service, with nothing being tried since.

.

Really. The forest is renowned for equine pursuits, followed the hunt a few times last year ...drag code Followed as per rules.

[greencard1]

Interesting that there are two different views here. Mike thinks that Angling is a 'sleeping giant' that will wake up when kicked and defend itself. Duncan thinks that Angling is disorganised, disjointed and would not be able to come together and defend itself if threatened.
I would like to think that Mike is right; but I fear that Duncan is right.
It may well be Wild Justice that puts us to the test; and It may be sooner than we think.

[Mike J]

Interesting that there are two different views here. Mike thinks that Angling is a 'sleeping giant' that will wake up when kicked and defend itself. Duncan thinks that Angling is disorganised, disjointed and would not be able to come together and defend itself if threatened.
I would like to think that Mike is right; but I fear that Duncan is right.
It may well be Wild Justice that puts us to the test; and It may be sooner than we think.

What I do agree with Duncan upon is the poor management of Anglings public face.
In the 21st century the need for clear thinking and a strong vibrant approach is an essential requirement for any business, and old men or celebrities are rarely up to the thought processes required.

Everything in business, and representing a sport is first and foremost a business, starts with the first step which means only those with a proven track record should be appointed to key positions with their performances monitored by quarterly assessments (of all staff) to track, advise, improve and encourage development.

The RSPB is continually providing a 'how to' example of how to reinvigorate a representative body and Angling could do no worse by following their example.

.

[Stewlaws]

Interesting that there are two different views here. Mike thinks that Angling is a 'sleeping giant' that will wake up when kicked and defend itself. Duncan thinks that Angling is disorganised, disjointed and would not be able to come together and defend itself if threatened.
I would like to think that Mike is right; but I fear that Duncan is right.
It may well be Wild Justice that puts us to the test; and It may be sooner than we think.

What I do agree with Duncan upon is the poor management of Anglings public face.
In the 21st century the need for clear thinking and a strong vibrant approach is an essential requirement for any business, and old men or celebrities are rarely up to the thought processes required.

Everything in business, and representing a sport is first and foremost a business, starts with the first step which means only those with a proven track record should be appointed to key positions with their performances monitored by quarterly assessments (of all staff) to track, advise, improve and encourage development.

The RSPB is continually providing a 'how to' example of how to reinvigorate a representative body and Angling could do no worse by following their example.

.

Nepotism.. didn't do it any favours

[Duncan Holmes]

Interesting that there are two different views here. Mike thinks that Angling is a 'sleeping giant' that will wake up when kicked and defend itself. Duncan thinks that Angling is disorganised, disjointed and would not be able to come together and defend itself if threatened.
I would like to think that Mike is right; but I fear that Duncan is right.
It may well be Wild Justice that puts us to the test; and It may be sooner than we think.

What I do agree with Duncan upon is the poor management of Anglings public face.
In the 21st century the need for clear thinking and a strong vibrant approach is an essential requirement for any business, and old men or celebrities are rarely up to the thought processes required.

Everything in business, and representing a sport is first and foremost a business, starts with the first step which means only those with a proven track record should be appointed to key positions with their performances monitored by quarterly assessments (of all staff) to track, advise, improve and encourage development.

The RSPB is continually providing a 'how to' example of how to reinvigorate a representative body and Angling could do no worse by following their example.

.

I also think the lack of investment in to the sport by the trade is shocking. Very little in terms of recruiting new anglers, very little back in to grass roots.

I think Mike mentioned before about purchasing waters like the RSPB and wildlife trusts have done which would increase angling cohesion and strength.

Korda embryo is about all I can think of coming back from the trade in significant measures.

[greencard1]

I have suggested before that the RSPB and Wildlife Trust have got cormorants and otters working for them.
If there is little or no angling interest on a particular water, the conservation groups can buy them cheaper.
My local pit complex has just been bought outright by the WT. Local anglers are waiting to see how long it is before angling is banned.
In 1980 BC (Before Cormorants) there were hundreds of anglers there every weekend of the season.
The complex was bought for £1million. Money from little old ladies donations; although the WT could have afforded it without their donations.

[Mike J]

Cormorants and Otters populations do not influence on business donations or memberships of wildlife organisations.

No business will donate money blindly, a sound reason and a clear accountancy trail in the annual Balance Sheet are the essential requirements.
Eg; A substantial $ donation from a US boatbuilder for my (non UK) angling club collapsed when the club management refused to meet the US Gov. requirements for acceptance.

Members must be kept well informed, to be able to vote at AGMs, to know where their money is going and who question who us spending it.

Most importantly both businesses and members want to feel they are getting 'something back' for their money.
For business good publicity is usually sufficient, but for members it must be something tangible and that is why Wildlife Trusts, the RSPB and National Trust will always have a loyal and supportive membership.

.

[greencard1]

David Attenborough campaigned for the Wildlife Trust to buy the complex.
That was enough to persuade the little old ladies to empty their piggy banks.

[Mike J]

David Attenborough campaigned for the Wildlife Trust to buy the complex.
That was enough to persuade the little old ladies to empty their piggy banks.

And that a prime example.
Provide a sound reason, an achievable target, a public face to highlight donations and something tangible for everyone to use forever at the end.

As for the local anglers, I would ask how many joined the Trust that now owns the complex inorder to have a voice in its future management?

.

[Stewlaws]

The wildfowling groups have actively sought to buy land, along with fly anglers doing likewise, these collectives duty bound to improve these areas, preserving their sport and for those generations ahead, I've included the wildfowling groups as a comparison, people will always draw comments that the fly anglers are elitists with deep pockets, the same cannot be said for the wildfowling groups, the thing that both share are a collective reasoning of protecting and either meeting the status quo or improving along with evolving their sport.

Fishing in terms of cohesion will never achieve in its current form, the generation coming into it will sit around overstocked lakes with F1s ... Hauling lipless pigs hooked on tutti-frutti or whatever the bait company push as vogue.


The angling trust have not answered or been prepared to discuss elephants in the room, as an organisation it has allowed itself to be brought to question on nepotism and rather than IT questioning controversial (relevant) issues ...it has seen itself muddied and open to apathy from the angling sector....

[davelumb]

Wildfowling is a single interest group. Angling is diverse. That's why carp fishing has so much clout - in a similar way to game angling - It's a large and united body of anglers. Pike anglers are too thin on the ground to have the same buying power - the same goes for the other subdivisions of angling.

The Trout and Salmon Association wouldn't join the formation of Angling Trust. I wonder why?

[greencard1]

If fishing will 'never achieve in its current form'; what form must it take in order to achieve cohesion?

[davelumb]

If fishing will 'never achieve in its current form'; what form must it take in order to achieve cohesion?

Everyone take up carp fishing!

[Steve C]

If fishing will 'never achieve in its current form'; what form must it take in order to achieve cohesion?

Everyone take up carp fishing!