Things Illegal

[British Red]

Stovie



IIRC it was the NRA / EA who were trying to reduce the population of an introduced fish. So I guess they had to give themselves permission to do it

Red

 

[Scuba Pete]

You can have a rod rest, you just cannot have two. The way thay see it is that you can only use one rod at a time, so that if you have two one is a fixed line.

You see people doing it all the time. When my mate took me to his pond the other week a fisherman had is rod, but then 50 yards along the bank he had another. My mate pointed out he was not allowed to do that and he brought it in.

 

[bambodoggy]

Hi Guys, interesting discussion you're having here, but you are aware that this type of fishing is not permitted in the Uk ?

Smart Ar**

 

[Scuba Pete]

You never know. If scotland becomes independent who knows what laws will change. Not that ever think that will happen.

 

[Bushman_Brett]

my pennys worth on the subject. (im also a fisherman)

I dont see any problem in discussing traditional methods and techniques wether ilegal or not, if it is known to be illegal then that should be stated, however the discussion is not illegal and in "extreme" circumstances could even prove to be life saving.

At the end of the day Rod And Line was a law introduced to protect against poachers and mass fishing so gentlemen of the days could have there sport, now its upheld because its big bussiness and an easy earner for the authorities. Rod and line can be damaging to fish to, theres foul hooking, theres the odd hook thats so deep it cant be removed and theres the odd fish thats so exhausted from the fight and being out the water so long so the fisherman can have his photo that it simply dies. (being a fisherman i know this)

The point is simple, it may be illegal to carry out an activity but it is not illegal to discuss and it should be discussed so our heritage and ways of the past are not lost.

 

[Burnt Ash]

Bogflogger

I have just had a moment of clarity!

Why do anglers use rod and line?
Because sporting gentlemen of the 1800’s used rod and line and did not like the idea of peasants catching ‘their fish’

(and other tosh, deleted)

Clarity? That's what you call it? Pinko socialist rubbish, IMO. Rod and line was being used to catch fish millenia before the notion of the 'sporting gentleman' was conceived.
BTW, the modern poacher is often a vicious, violent, criminal: in it to make a lot of money quickly. He cares nothing about conservation, humanity towards his quarry, or the wellfare of anyone who stands in his way. Forget the romantic claptrap about poor oppressed peasants trying to guddle a few trout or snare the odd rabbit to feed their poor, starving, wee bairns. I could introduce you to several river bailiffs and game keepers who can tell you a very different story of the extreme violence and intimidation directed at them and their families by poachers.

Burnt Ash

 

[torjusg]

Clarity? That's what you call it? Pinko socialist rubbish, IMO. Rod and line was being used to catch fish millenia before the notion of the 'sporting gentleman' was conceived.
BTW, the modern poacher is often a vicious, violent, criminal: in it to make a lot of money quickly. He cares nothing about conservation, humanity towards his quarry, or the wellfare of anyone who stands in his way. Forget the romantic claptrap about poor oppressed peasants trying to guddle a few trout or snare the odd rabbit to feed their poor, starving, wee bairns. I could introduce you to several river bailiffs and game keepers who can tell you a very different story of the extreme violence and intimidation directed at them and their families by poachers.

Burnt Ash

But he is right, poaching was nearly essential to the peasants of Europe as many of them couldn't afford enough food, far less anything with protein. The crown and the nobility had claimed all land, particulary all forested for their own sports-hunting. Fish wasn't considered game in the medieval, but they were quick to claim the rights as soon as it became fashionable. Banning anything except hook and line was nothing was ok for the ones with enough food, but for the people who needed the fish (Oh yes, people needed them until quite recently) that just wasn't efficient enough.

So stop blaming it on socialism, the reason why your country has gotten so grossly overpopulated is because of greedy, rich people. But that is an entirely different debate.

 

[Wayland]

And I thought this thread had just calmed down a bit.

Try and keep it civil please. it's not too much to ask is it?

 

[mojofilter]

The statement that "it is illegal to use a rod rest in Scotland" is wrong!

 

[British Red]

The statement that "it is illegal to use a rod rest in Scotland" is wrong!

I'm sure you are right mojofilter! I was quoting from another thread which I found fascinating and have probably got myself muddled. The relevant passage (sourced from Scottish Executive Fisheries own website) states

"The courts have determined that laying down a rod and leaving it supported on a rock or stone constitutes fishing with a set line. This would apply equally to the use of a rod rest. Thus, anyone who fishes for coarse fish in Scotland using accepted methods for that branch of the sport runs the risk of being charged with fishing illegally."

Now I may have got that out of context and misled (sorry if thats the case) - just shows how a good thread giving guidance in these areas would be useful

Heres the source BTW

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Fisheries/Salmon-Trout-Coarse/17380/8700

Red

 

[mojofilter]

Without reading the link, I would suspect that it applies to migratory game fish and native brown trout.

 

[Angus Og]

the modern poacher is often a vicious, violent, criminal: in it to make a lot of money quickly. He cares nothing about conservation, humanity towards his quarry, or the wellfare of anyone who stands in his way.

Ye right and the landowners are in it just to save the fish and deer for there good health.

 

[Tengu]

I dont believe that either.

Next you will be saying that people who hunt deer with a licence (No, Im not sure how they manage `that`) are vicious and bloodthirsty.

 

[bogflogger]

Read this lot, and then tell me there is no problem with BCUK's Policy of saying nothing about the Legality of these methods:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmhansrd/cm050623/text/50623w01.htm

http://www.defra.gov.uk/paw/publications/law/4.htm

http://www.defra.gov.uk/paw/prosecutions/default.htm

http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/news/1489554?lang=_e&region=Northeast

http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/subjects/fish/286019/247642/?lang=_e

http://news.scotsman.com/uk.cfm?id=1527162006

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/4423969.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/tyne/3089144.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/cumbria/3987493.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/3549730.stm

 

[Bushman_Brett]

The discussion of an old time method is not illegal even if carrying out the act is, as long as that is pointed out in the post there is no problem, Theres something in this country called freedom of speech and loosing that and techniques/knowledge from the past should not be an option.

 

[Stuart]

Bogflogger you are really beginning to wind me up now.

I have a particular interest in primitive traps, I am fascinated by the mechanics of their design and the ingenuity of their construction.

Traps after all represent mankind’s first steps into a mechanised world, deadfalls and tensioned snares are the very first automated machines invented by mankind, The first time that man used his newly acquired knowledge of scientific principles such as friction, potential and kinetic energy, angles, force, momentum, and so forth to build devices that were intended to perform a task under their own power without human supervision, leaving their owner free to do other things. The realization of this makes the study of mankind’s first automated machines a fascinating subject in its own right, regardless of the laws pertaining to their actual use.

In my study of this subject and my wish to discuss it here with likeminded individuals I break no laws, yet you would have me branded a vicious criminal

Your moral position is no better than that of those who campaign for all knives to be banned because they are weapons!

Of course when posting information on trapping or fishing personal responsible conduct dictates that I protect the ignorant, by making a clear statement that in the UK this subject is for academic study only.

But it is not an actual requirement for me to do so, the only requirement is that I don’t specifically condone or encourage others to break the law.

If in this case you feel a moral obligation to go one further and protect the ignorant on my behalf by adding the relevant information on the legal situation in the United Kingdom, then that is your prerogative, but be tactful in your method.

Barging into every thread on this forum where historical or anthropological discussion of fishing or trapping is taking place and posting to chastise people and imply delinquency simply because they did not scribe lengthy legal disclaimers to protect those ignorant of their own country’s laws is akin to storming into a genetic chemistry lecture at Cambridge condemning all present, because you believe that the discussion and study of genetics could only serve the purpose of human cloning.

 

[Simon E]

Bogflogger you are really beginning to wind me up now.

I have a particular interest in primitive traps, I am fascinated by the mechanics of their design and the ingenuity of their construction.

Traps after all represent mankind’s first steps into a mechanised world, deadfalls and tensioned snares are the very first automated machines invented by mankind, The first time that man used his newly acquired knowledge of scientific principles such as friction, potential and kinetic energy, angles, force, momentum, and so forth to build devices that were intended to perform a task under their own power without human supervision, leaving their owner free to do other things. The realization of this makes the study of mankind’s first automated machines a fascinating subject in its own right, regardless of the laws pertaining to their actual use.

In my study of this subject and my wish to discuss it here with likeminded individuals I break no laws, yet you would have me branded a vicious criminal

Your moral position is no better than that of those who campaign for all knives to be banned because they are weapons!

Of course when posting information on trapping or fishing personal responsible conduct dictates that I protect the ignorant, by making a clear statement that in the UK this subject is for academic study only.

But it is not an actual requirement for me to do so, the only requirement is that I don’t specifically condone or encourage others to break the law.

If in this case you feel a moral obligation to go one further and protect the ignorant on my behalf by adding the relevant information on the legal situation in the United Kingdom, then that is your prerogative, but be tactful in your method.

Barging into every thread on this forum where historical or anthropological discussion of fishing or trapping is taking place and posting to chastise people and imply delinquency simply because they did not scribe lengthy legal disclaimers to protect those ignorant of their own country’s laws is akin to storming into a genetic chemistry lecture at Cambridge condemning all present, because you believe that the discussion and study of genetics could only serve the purpose of human cloning.

Here! Here! I'm getting a bit fed up of the Nanny attitude too to be perfectly honest.

 

[bogflogger]

Of course when posting information on trapping or fishing personal responsible conduct dictates that I protect the ignorant, by making a clear statement that in the UK this subject is for academic study only.

But it is not an actual requirement for me to do so, the only requirement is that I don’t specifically condone or encourage others to break the law.

The issue is NOT the discussion of these methods, as I have already said in a reply to Ahijno's post above.

The issue IS BCUK's dual standards, in claiming that this is an Educational website (where one would hope infomation would be accurate) and yet management still refuse to take any responsibility for the content on the website.

As I have also said earlier, no amount of shouting or character assassination, is going to alter the fact that these methods are Illegal in the UK.

 

[Ahjno]

The issue IS BCUK's dual standards, in claiming that this is an Educational website (where one would hope infomation would be accurate) and yet management still refuse to take any responsibility for the content on the website.

Boggy

I planned not to add anything more on this thread ... as this is one that can be discussed 'till end of time.

Wikipedia is an Educational website ... and even they don't take responsibility for the content of their website:

Wikipedia General Disclaimer

Wikipedia Risk Disclaimer

Wikipedia Medical disclaimer

Wikipedia Legal Disclaimer

Wikipedia Content Disclaimer

It's the way these sort of websites work, due to the amount of people that contribute to it and the amount of information that is on it.
I tried to find a forum / website other than government, that does take responsibilities for it's contents ... no joy though ...

Johan

 

[Bushman_Brett]

your making no sense, and i say your acting like a troll. This site is an educational site where "members" discuss technique and methods of all forms and without fail if something in a thread is illegal to practise it will be pointed out by a member and the discussion continues, your argument makes no sense, do you want all activities that are illegal in the UK to be banned from the board? better get down your local pub and start policing there to. Like i said theres something called freedom of speech.