|
FishyChris, far be it from me to argue with a lawyer, but….. I take minor issue with some of your comments. Tax avoidance is legal. Its evasion that breaks the rules. We may get upset when corporations organise their affairs to pay less tax, (which is why the Amazon’s of this world employ expensive tax professionals) but that is more a comment on poorly framed laws (which do not deliver what is intended or the failure of the authorities to apply the law). Tax law recognises devices which are designed for this express purpose rather than compelling business reasons and classes such devices as evasion not (legitimate) avoidance. To comment on your point re the binary nature of rules, 'bending' them by the use of devices which have no business reasons but whose prime purpose is to avoid the tax which is legitimately due breaks the law by turning (legal) avoidance into (illegal) evasion.
The same is true of our current piscatorial situation, it is poorly framed laws and guidance which has inevitably caused the issues which underlie this thread. Inherent ambiguity in laws and guidance merely facilitate non-compliance. I agree that it is not right that individuals have been targeted when in legal terms they have done nothing wrong and appreciate that you have not promoted nationwide travel to fish. I am no cheerleader for Mr Plod, but I recognise a hospital pass when I see it. I would only comment that issues in defining ‘available’ (to the subject) whilst they exist seem much more straightforward than defining ‘local’!
Roll on 16th June!
Posted on March 14, 2021 at 11:25 AM
|
|
The recent spate of posts on the impacts for us as individuals of the ambiguities inherent in the
government’s confused approach to law making and guidance have proved to be gentle distraction this morning when under other circumstances I would have been out for a final river fling this season. It is helpful that FishyChris, thorough his professional expertise, has managed to inject a degree of robustness into the exchanges.
'Good' laws (and guidance) are those which are clear, unambiguous, and generally fair to all who are impacted. Their underlying purpose is clear and their logic accepted by most citizens, however irksome or irritating following them proves to be. If tomorrow I venture for a river-side walk and come across someone legering or float fishing, the interpretation is clear, they are breaking the law, no ifs or buts. Sadly the same cannot be said for current covid-19 legislation and guidance.
Fisheries remain open for understandable reasons but these are not necessarily reasons which are are consistent with good laws. If the purpose of the law is to restrict movements and thereby contacts it makes more sense to close them as we did last spring. Currently we can fish under the permitted exceptions to the regulations on our own for permitted ‘exercise’ (a bending device which I feel sure Paul and others recognise and its inclusion does few favours for overall attitudes towards compliance.)
I accept in mitigation that permitting fishing has some merit in providing an outlet in these stifled times and without doubt will have a positive impact for the mental health of many, but it sets a tone which encourages rule bending and is not to my mind consistent with good law and official guidance. The guidance permits travel to fish provided it is local. And herein is the rub, as there is no accepted definition, clear guidance or precedent for what is local.
We all recognise and accept the extremes for what they are. Based in Hertfordshire if I venture for a final day out onto the Severn, I am not by any measure staying local. I have contravened the guidance and lay myself open to predictable repercussions. Where I live I have no ready access to available local river fishing and have sadly concluded I must wait until matters change. That is my decision which I think is consistent both with the letter and spirit of the restrictions and by so doing I am minimising the chances of transmission, and infection spread which is (as has been pointed out by others) the purpose of the restrictions.
I agree that each of us has to make our own decisions within the framework, but equally we need to consider to the interests of the society in which we live as well as our own. Local is a subjective and ill-defined concept the existence of which in the guidance merely facilitates rule bending. Better to replace ‘local’ with ‘nearest available facility’ (my best efforts in the absence of formal legal training) for exercise and other permissible exceptions.
What we require is positive, unambiguous leadership in such times and not the 'cakeism' (having it and eating it) we have been blessed with.
Posted on March 14, 2021 at 10:05 AM
|
|
As a retired member based near London, who in 'normal' times visits the BAA area 2x a year for a few days to fish I have to say that £40 represents unparalleled value for money. The range and number of waters is second to none, and is by any criteria exceptional value for money. You will find nothing of this quality at these prices within 50 miles of where I live in SW Herts and around the £50 p.a. level you are likely to find a perhaps 3-4 club waters at a maximum.
I appreciate that we 'soft' southerners 'enjoy' generally higher wages that our friends in the Midlands and elsewhere, but we also face higher costs. £40 p.a. is less than 11p per day for the whole year. Where else would you find such value?
The other side of this coin is however what benefits or improvements could members expect for the additional subscription assuming that current levels are coverings costs? Additional waters leased? Improved car parking, security and access? Improved or enhanced venue maintenance? Stocking programmes on owned waters? More rigourous bailiffing? All would be welcomed by many members I feel sure, but just because you can put up subs it doesn't mean you should. Any increase should be for an agreed purpose in the interests of members generally.
Posted on January 29, 2021 at 6:09 PM
|
|
Thanks Atlast and Mick for the leads.
I'll check out the facebook page and Mick, yes I take your point. Catching barbel on a set up such as you describe is a wonderful experience (on a centrepin) and one I've done with some success on a good trotting peg just down from Arley. As you say a great method and a thrilling experience.
I should tell you I spent a day with a buddy doing this about 5 years ago and we stood should to shoulder in about 2 feet of water above a run just above Highley I got snagged and needed to return to the bank to mend my terminal tackle. He remained there and in my absence caught a dace and just as it came to the hand a salmon came from behind between his legs and attempted to size the dace. It came clear of the water in front of him, we both saw it. He nearly left his waders like some cartoon character! Of such events are memories indelibly made!
Any more intel from others gratefully received.
Posted on September 02, 2020 at 9:30 AM
|
|
Along with some long-standing angling friends I am are coming to the Middle Severn for our annual week's river fishing break on Sunday 6th. We've done so for many years. I've followed the intel on the forum for some weeks and note that low water and oxygen levels have had predictable results. Although summer now seems to be distant memory and we've had rain, the effect on the prevailing levels appears to be marginal at best, and catches remain at best patchy. We usually fish in the area between Eardington and Arley (and Trimpley) and sometimes journey to the Teme.
I wondered if any fellow members have fished these sections recently and have up to date thoughts they would be prepared to share? We primarily target the barbel and chub, but would be content to trot for smaller quarry. The important thing for us is days of enjoyment especially this year after what we have all experienced. One of our number is terminally ill and this is likely to be our last trip together so preparation to make the most of a few days together has assumed an altogether more important perspective.
Any thoughts would be gratefully received along with any suggestions for alternative sections which might be more productive than our usual haunts.
Thanks in advance for your help.
Posted on September 01, 2020 at 10:16 AM
|
