Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED

Options
2

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    ytpe2r5bxkn0c1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 32,688 ✭✭✭✭ytpe2r5bxkn0c1


    +1. I read it that the licence is only on the cards if anglers want it. So what exactly is this all about? I'm totally confused at this point.


  • Options
    #33
    jkchambers
    Registered Users Posts: 380 ✭✭jkchambers


    Zzippy wrote: »
    John, you seem to be the only one suggesting this. You've even posted yourself that the minister said if anglers don't want it it won't be in the legislation. Nothing I have heard has indicated that IFI are pushing a licence - most people in IFI remember only too well the last licence fiasco. I've not heard the minister or government pushing it.
    So who exactly is suggesting that anglers make a contribution??? I'm not saying its a bad idea, just that you're the only person anywhere who seems to be keeping this going. Do you want a licence?
    IFI called all feds into a meeting on sept 3 to look at the funding of inland fisheries into the future. All feds knew that they wanted someone to suggest angler contributions. In April 2012 they invited feds in seperately for general talks. They raised it with each fed.
    A thread on the subject
    http://www.irelandscoarsefishing.com/phpbb3/general-fishing-news/topic4705.html
    Also on this site
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056760564


  • Options
    #34
    ytpe2r5bxkn0c1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 32,688 ✭✭✭✭ytpe2r5bxkn0c1


    Who are these Feds? I fish coarse, trout, and sea and apart from the obligatory club membership to fish the trout river I have no contact with any Feds. Asked guys at the shore today and while they all beach fished and trout fished none knew anything about federations.

    Can you give us an idiot's guide and explain the pros and coins of fed membership? Thanks.


  • Options
    #35
    Zzippy
    Registered Users Posts: 14,166 ✭✭✭✭Zzippy


    jkchambers wrote: »
    IFI called all feds into a meeting on sept 3 to look at the funding of inland fisheries into the future. All feds knew that they wanted someone to suggest angler contributions. In April 2012 they invited feds in seperately for general talks. They raised it with each fed.
    A thread on the subject
    http://www.irelandscoarsefishing.com/phpbb3/general-fishing-news/topic4705.html
    Also on this site
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056760564

    That's all very well, but if they haven't brought it up since, and its not included in the heads of bill, it doesn't seem to be a runner. I'm a member of 2 federations through clubs in different disciplines, but I would say federations represent maybe 10% of anglers in Ireland, at a push. If they were going to bring in a licence there would have to be a public consultation, not just a couple of meetings with federations which are irrelevant to most anglers.


  • Options
    #36
    jkchambers
    Registered Users Posts: 380 ✭✭jkchambers


    Zzippy wrote: »
    That's all very well, but if they haven't brought it up since, and its not included in the heads of bill, it doesn't seem to be a runner. I'm a member of 2 federations through clubs in different disciplines, but I would say federations represent maybe 10% of anglers in Ireland, at a push. If they were going to bring in a licence there would have to be a public consultation, not just a couple of meetings with federations which are irrelevant to most anglers.
    All the Feds had their seperate annual meetings with IFI last month where they raised the subject once again.
    The TDI report will be published in a few weeks. I believe that it will show around 30% of anglers are members of clubs. I would think that maybe 90% of clubs would e affiliated to a fed maybe just for the purpose of cheap club insurance. The public consultation period starts on 13th May and goes on to 28th June. I am told notices of these 5 open meetings were in the press.
    http://www.dcenr.gov.ie/Natural/Inland+Fisheries/Latest+News/


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    jkchambers
    Registered Users Posts: 380 ✭✭jkchambers


    Harrison Obedient Cutoffs wrote: »
    Who are these Feds? I fish coarse, trout, and sea and apart from the obligatory club membership to fish the trout river I have no contact with any Feds. Asked guys at the shore today and while they all beach fished and trout fished none knew anything about federations.

    Can you give us an idiot's guide and explain the pros and coins of fed membership? Thanks.
    Individual anglers dont join feds. Clubs affiliate to fedsto represent their views, obtain cheap insurance and partake in fed national and international competitions.
    You would expect expect that there would be 5 different feds with one representing each of the following trout, salmon, pike, coarse and sea. However because of splits we have 2 salmon, 2 trout, 2 coarse, 2 sea and 1 pike
    I am chairman of the pike fed. Below is the link to our website. We have a message board which you can access by clicking on the news and forum tab
    http://www.angling-in-ireland.com/


  • Options
    #38
    ytpe2r5bxkn0c1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 32,688 ✭✭✭✭ytpe2r5bxkn0c1


    Thanks for the clarity but most anglers are members of clubs just because they have to be to fish certain waters. They are not active and certainly not really represented by any federation reps. Perhaps we should be more involved but most just want to get out fishing.


  • Options
    #39
    jkchambers
    Registered Users Posts: 380 ✭✭jkchambers


    Harrison Obedient Cutoffs wrote: »
    Thanks for the clarity but most anglers are members of clubs just because they have to be to fish certain waters. They are not active and certainly not really represented by any federation reps. Perhaps we should be more involved but most just want to get out fishing.
    A lot more trout and salmon anglers would be members of clubs in order to fish club controlled waters. That is not the case with pike, coarse and sea anglers whose clubs rarely control fishing waters


  • Options
    #40
    jimmymcg
    Registered Users Posts: 29 ✭jimmymcg


    just had a look at http://www.angling-in-ireland.com/ .. the first thing i notice on your websight is 'becoming a waterkeeper' .

    It is very clear to me from reading different forums that most (not all ) anglers are totally out of touch with how to handle guarding our waters. i read on another forum last year of non nationals in the midlands getting fined 4000 in court, and someone said that their car should have been seized also. I am best friends with a garda, and asked him. he said that small items should be seized for evidence, while cars ect can be seized, it would be ridiculous to do so.the judges hand them back after the case,and rarely confiscate them... This is why I am totally against 'water-keepers'. This english system is not the way to go in Ireland. People campaigning for more state staff would be more productive, not trying to undermine them, by creating a reserve.

    Regarding a licence, I will be campaigning against it. It is not necessary. Very little money is needed to fund fishery protection in the grand scheme of things. Its one of the last things we have free in the country.long may it continue.


  • Options
    #41
    Allround Predator
    Closed Accounts Posts: 105 ✭✭Allround Predator


    Personally I would lobby against the introduction of a charge or rod licence! I am a course and pike angler and I feel that very little money would be put back if at all into course fishing in my area.

    I live in Dublin city center and the Royal canal is just 3 minutes from my house yet I haven't fish it since I was a kid. The royal canal is totally neglected all the way from the city center up past Broom bridge, it is an awful waste, I would love to be able fish down there on some evenings after work but there are no fish in it. If I want to go fishing I have to get a train or go to some fishery. As I see it, it costs me enough money to go fishing as it is, when there's a perfectly good canal down the road from me but the fishery's board chooses to neglect it because of were it is!

    Me and many other anglers from the city center have made numerous attempt's to have the fishery board stock up the canal between the North Strand and Broom Bridge over the years but they insist on fobbing us off every time!

    This new legislation should cover all areas from the Shannon to the Liffey to the Grand canal to a little stretch of canal in the city center. All areas, only then would it get my support!!...


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    jkchambers
    Registered Users Posts: 380 ✭✭jkchambers


    http://www.dcenr.gov.ie/Natural/Inland+Fisheries/Latest+News/


  • Options
    #43
    jkchambers
    Registered Users Posts: 380 ✭✭jkchambers


    It appears that all the Federations , apart from one, now support the idea of a compulsory angler registration charge where 100% of the funds raised will go into a ringfenced kitty to be spent on the likes of protection, development, youth etc and where anglers have a major say on what projects etc gets funded.
    Individuals, clubs and federations have until 28th June to make submissions on what they would like to see in the fisheries legislation.


  • Options
    #44
    mattcullen
    Registered Users Posts: 286 ✭✭mattcullen


    jkchambers wrote: »
    It appears that all the Federations , apart from one, now support the idea of a compulsory angler registration charge where 100% of the funds raised will go into a ringfenced kitty to be spent on the likes of protection, development, youth etc and where anglers have a major say on what projects etc gets funded.
    Individuals, clubs and federations have until 28th June to make submissions on what they would like to see in the fisheries legislation.

    Thanks for the update. Do you know was it the sea anglers who voted against the charge? If so I can understand why..How could the government charge anglers to 'protect' and 'develop' a fishery which they actively endorse the destruction of through overfishing? It's nuts. Maybe the rivers and lakes are a different story but I don't think the charge should apply to sea anglers and would like to make a submission along those lines.

    Would you know how to go about making a submission?

    Thanks again for posting


  • Options
    #45
    jkchambers
    Registered Users Posts: 380 ✭✭jkchambers


    mattcullen wrote: »
    Thanks for the update. Do you know was it the sea anglers who voted against the charge? If so I can understand why..How could the government charge anglers to 'protect' and 'develop' a fishery which they actively endorse the destruction of through overfishing? It's nuts. Maybe the rivers and lakes are a different story but I don't think the charge should apply to sea anglers and would like to make a submission along those lines.

    Would you know how to go about making a submission?

    Thanks again for posting
    As far as I know TAFI are the only ones against.
    Here is a link to info on the Dept`s website. It shows where you can send your submission


  • Options
    #46
    Zzippy
    Registered Users Posts: 14,166 ✭✭✭✭Zzippy


    jkchambers wrote: »
    As far as I know TAFI are the only ones against.
    Here is a link to info on the Dept`s website. It shows where you can send your submission

    Are IFSA in favour?


  • Options
    #47
    mattcullen
    Registered Users Posts: 286 ✭✭mattcullen


    jkchambers wrote: »
    As far as I know TAFI are the only ones against.
    Here is a link to info on the Dept`s website. It shows where you can send your submission

    Thanks, submission e-mailed


  • Options
    #48
    EmptyTree
    Registered Users Posts: 748 ✭✭✭EmptyTree


    I don't think this has been asked yet, apologies if it has, but if licence fee money is to be ring fenced for our sport, will that see an equal reduction in funding given by the government to the various bodies that currently manage the environs in which we fish?

    In other words, are we sure this isn't just a stelth tax that we won't see any benefit from at all??


  • Options
    #49
    jkchambers
    Registered Users Posts: 380 ✭✭jkchambers


    EmptyTree wrote: »
    I don't think this has been asked yet, apologies if it has, but if licence fee money is to be ring fenced for our sport, will that see an equal reduction in funding given by the government to the various bodies that currently manage the environs in which we fish?

    In other words, are we sure this isn't just a stelth tax that we won't see any benefit from at all??
    I was one of 2 anglers in the Dail in 1988 when Minister Brendan Daly brought in the rod licence. At the time he estimated that it would raise Ir£600000. He quickly announced that he was cutting the State allocation to the fisheries boards by that amount.
    This time the Minister has assured us that all funds raised would be for protection, development etc and that the funds raised would be kept in a separate kitty and that this would not impact on the States allocation to IFI


  • Options
    #50
    EmptyTree
    Registered Users Posts: 748 ✭✭✭EmptyTree


    jkchambers wrote: »
    I was one of 2 anglers in the Dail in 1988 when Minister Brendan Daly brought in the rod licence. At the time he estimated that it would raise Ir£600000. He quickly announced that he was cutting the State allocation to the fisheries boards by that amount.

    That's my fear :mad:
    jkchambers wrote: »
    This time the Minister has assured us that all funds raised would be for protection, development etc and that the funds raised would be kept in a separate kitty and that this would not impact on the States allocation to IFI

    Great news if that's the case, thanks for that - Lets hope the Government keep to their word.


  • Options
    #51
    nc13
    Registered Users Posts: 78 ✭✭nc13


    I am only able to get out and fish a few times a year (4 or 5 times) due to other commitments. If a licence or yearly fee comes in, this will force people like me away from fishing.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    ytpe2r5bxkn0c1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 32,688 ✭✭✭✭ytpe2r5bxkn0c1


    nc13 wrote: »
    I am only able to get out and fish a few times a year (4 or 5 times) due to other commitments. If a licence or yearly fee comes in, this will force people like me away from fishing.

    My feelings exactly. Easily 70% of those I know who fish are infrequent anglers who enjoy a Summer evening out fishing with friends or family. Many pay club membership to fish brown trout on the local streams but could not justify paying an annual licence fee as well.


  • Options
    #53
    jkchambers
    Registered Users Posts: 380 ✭✭jkchambers


    Tomorrow is the last day for making submissions.


  • Options
    #54
    madchild
    Closed Accounts Posts: 113 ✭✭madchild


    they can **** off with their license it,s bad enough the price were paying to fish for salmon and tags and then permits for the river or lake of choice for the day if they think i,m goin to pay to fish for dirty pike or course fishing they have their ****e i don,t even pay for trout fishing as most of the river here have no clubs but we have a good stock of wild browns because the local anglers know not to be killing fish less than a pund in weight unlike the gringos that have came here and cleaned our rivers


  • Options
    #55
    EmptyTree
    Registered Users Posts: 748 ✭✭✭EmptyTree


    madchild wrote: »
    they can **** off with their license it,s bad enough the price were paying to fish for salmon and tags and then permits for the river or lake of choice for the day if they think i,m goin to pay to fish for dirty pike or course fishing they have their ****e i don,t even pay for trout fishing as most of the river here have no clubs but we have a good stock of wild browns because the local anglers know not to be killing fish less than a pund in weight unlike the gringos that have came here and cleaned our rivers

    Just for clarity, do you currently fish for salmon/sea trout??


  • Options
    #56
    demanufactured
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,756 ✭✭✭demanufactured


    madchild wrote: »
    they can **** off with their license it,s bad enough the price were paying to fish for salmon and tags and then permits for the river or lake of choice for the day if they think i,m goin to pay to fish for dirty pike or course fishing they have their ****e i don,t even pay for trout fishing as most of the river here have no clubs but we have a good stock of wild browns because the local anglers know not to be killing fish less than a pund in weight unlike the gringos that have came here and cleaned our rivers

    Dirty pike????
    Some attitude to fishing


  • Options
    #57
    madchild
    Closed Accounts Posts: 113 ✭✭madchild


    EmptyTree wrote: »
    Just for clarity, do you currently fish for salmon/sea trout??

    I do i fish for everything why do you ask


  • Options
    #58
    madchild
    Closed Accounts Posts: 113 ✭✭madchild


    demanufactured wrote: »
    Dirty pike????
    Some attitude to fishing

    would you eat one?:cool:


  • Options
    #59
    EmptyTree
    Registered Users Posts: 748 ✭✭✭EmptyTree


    madchild wrote: »
    I do i fish for everything why do you ask

    Then I don't fully understand why you're objecting so strongly to a new licence system since the it will cover all species of fish (as is my understanding).

    If:
    A) The new licence was brought in, but you still required a separate Salmon/sea trout licence

    or

    B) You currently fish for a species that doesn't require a licence

    then I could see your point as a new licence would be an additional cost. But a new licence system looks like it won't be on top of the current salmon/sea trout licence, in fact, it will probably be cheaper than the current salmon/sea trout licence because of the sheer number of anglers in Ireland would bring down the cost.

    So if anything I would have thought someone in your situation would support a new (possibly cheaper) licence. At the very least, it makes no real difference to your current possition.


  • Options
    #60
    demanufactured
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,756 ✭✭✭demanufactured


    madchild wrote: »
    would you eat one?:cool:

    No I release them like all decent pike anglers do.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    madchild
    Closed Accounts Posts: 113 ✭✭madchild


    Fair enough if that is the case but i don,t see any reason why anyone should have to pay for a license to fish i object to having to pay for the current salmon/seatrout license i think it,s enough to have to pay for a permit to fish your water of choice and feckin tags on top of it.


Advertisement