I think this has been covered in depth in another thread.Newt pointed out that the fish did not react when they where injected with a saline solution,so it wasn't the injection that caused the distress it was the substance.So this sharp needle going into an area around the mouth caused no pain,But that bit wasn't reported by anybody yesterday.
Joe  
Don't argue with an idiot they will only bring you down to there level and beat you on experience
Look !!!! are we,,or is anyone seriuosly saying that we've all been dragging fish,, in some cases...considerable distances across lakes, ponds, rivers and sea......and everyone was of the opinion that the fish loved it...........I think not.
This is also the opinion of several fish..
If we're all honest, we've probably all killed the odd fish accidentally especially in the early days when we were learning how to use a dsigorger properly! bream have the annoying habit of taking a hook right down to their swim bladder, I knoe poking around with the disgorger aint the way forward and we should but the line...the point Im trying to make is that we do cause fish pain sometimes and we should accept this as part of the sport we love and stop trying to hide behind reports etc. We foul hook fish, have eels swallowing our hooks, and "lip" fish with a heavy strike occassionally so let's just hold our hands up agree?
I get the feeling we've been infiltrated by Antis. Nothing like splitting the ranks. Divide and conquer isn't it? This is at least the 3rd thread brought up about this since that bullsh!t was reported by the Broadcasting B*****ks Company. Time to put it to bed I think.
What else do you want to get us to admit to? Badger baiting? Ratting? Drug abuse? Come on lets all confess on a Public open forum. Confession may be good for the soul, but its also the best way to incriminate yourself.
I'm not accepting anything that contradicts itself like that report.
Hawkyboy - you can believe what you like, but don't try and get me to jump on side. I am not sure just who's side you're on. Trying to get anglers to freely admit they don't look after their catches properly. How much was your donation to PETA?
Beebs, much as I'd like to put it to bed, we can't just ignore debates planned on this subject. Apparently BBC's Countryfile TV program is going to debate fishing this Sunday. Are we just going to let them get on with it, or should we all e-mail pro-angling comments to John Craven as requested by the NFA?
If they do feel pain why do they swim away from you when you hook them ? I'd av thought they'd av swam towards you if it did hurt !
I'd like to see 'them' enforce it if it did get banned
All the tackle shops,fisheries and anyting else connected with angling would go out of business.
It's all a load of balls and just another excuse for them do gooder's to crawl out of there holes and justify there existance.
I can see it know on the Bridgey in trafford park,50 blokes all minding there own business one sunday morning when Tarquin turns up with swampy and says do you know that fish can feel pain,the air would turn blue with abuse and would probably end in OFF and then someone would get very wet ! Oh they must have slipped Officer !
Lid - you can email John Craven if you want. It'll have the same effect as emailing their 'Have your say' bit on their web site did the other week.
As long as there are people who are against angling, there's going to be the same old arguments for and against. If the BBC have got their own agenda, then do you honeslty think they give a toss about angler's views? You've only got to see the posts they allowed to be shown when they had that ridiculous debate on the net. The ones who were pro-angling were outrageous - some even admitting that they thought fish felt pain even though it didn't stop them fishing. What kind of signals does that put out of the kind of people anglers really are? Where were all the rational arguments? Not allowed to be shown thats where. And still not even a mention of the Rose report. Do you think it's a coincidence that they've decided to have a debate on TV so soon after that report? I think not.
It's a complete waste of time trying to rationalise with the BBC. They will broadcast whatever they want. The only way to deal with them is to comlain to an impartial body like the Broadcasting complaints commision about their biased reporting.
I think the Angling organisations and even the Environment Agency should be debating on the side of Anglers, not have a load of individual voices flooding John Craven's email folder. It's the yapping puppy syndrome. Carry on reacting every time someone has a pop at angling and people will be sick of hearing from you all the time and stop listening, but when the big dogs barks, every body listens.
Dragging this up another time is achieving nothing. I can't remember where I read somewhere about what would happen to the EA if angling was banned. But what would be the point of the EA? Who would really care if a river got polluted if nobody fished it? The average rambler wouldn't know unless it was blindingly obvious, but even then I don't think it'd put them off their afternoon stroll. Would PETA be out in force, up in arms about the treatment of fish - would they b*****x. It's the anglers and angling that keep the waterways clean and its anglers and angling that PETA are against. Are PETA gonna subsidise the EA to keep the rivers clean when there's no income from rod licences? No - 'cos they'll be going for the banning of pets and putting their money into that.
I've already wasted enough of my time bothering to reply to this, so John Craven can rest easy knowing there'll be one less email in his Inbox.
I think that all of these antis are just a whole load of time wasters. AS it has all ready been metioned how many baits have bee sting poisin in? None i hear you all say. How was that a even remotely fair test.
p.s. It wasnt.
Wheres my float oh my god wheres my float, oh yeah im ledger fishing.
You haven't wasted your time replying on this thread because I, and I'm sure others, value your comments and opinions.
I certainly agree that the pro angling response should come from more unified manner from the major angling organisations. I don't even know how we are meant to know that Craven is asking for e-mails on the subject. The only thing I heard came in the forwarded e-mail from my club which apparently originated from the NFA. I will send a short e-mail to him myself on the off chance that it might influence the debate.
In all fairness I think that most people who have posted on the subject have made some valuable points and yes you're quite right beebs when you say that the anti's will use the 'written' word against anglers if they get the chance, especially if written by an angler.
It's a political world out there and it's all about point scoring. Score enough and you win the game regardless if you're right or wrong.
Of the 3million plus anglers in this country, there are 62million who don't fish (whoops Mrs Able just had a young'un - 62 million + 1 ) and of them the majority more than likely aren't bothered either way whether or not fishing continues but mention the bad words, such as pain, cruelty, etc, and it certainly raises peoples emotions. It is this that the anti's play upon as ultimately it is the majority voice that is heard, especially around election manifesto time.
Anglers, angling and their representative bodies do need to be heard but heard in unison and at the right times.
Personally I do believe that the BBC have a hidden agenda with regards to these debates and I don't think it is to do with sensationalism as they don't need the business being licence funded. Then again I would have expected them to handle any debates 'on the fence' but so far they certainly seem to be dangling over into the anti's field - lets hope they end up in the mud
I doubt fishing would ever be banned, but we have to keep a careful eye. There are number of activities that logically fall in front of fishing as candidates for targeting by the antis and possible banning. First hunting with dogs, then game shooting followed by vermin shooting and then possibly angling.
I think we all need to support all legal country pursuits, not just to protect angling, but also to protect heritage and the countryside.
If we all stopped doing things that injured/killed other creatures, then the first thing to go would have to be ANY form of mechanised transport! I must have wiped out MILLIONS of bugs on my visor as a motorcyclist over the years
I also regularly squash furry things with my car wheels & bugs by the billion all over the bonnet/windscreen
Worst of all, if I am ill or cut myself I use various antibiotics to snuff out the bacteria(vicious or what[?]).
To top it all I pour bleach down the bog which kills everything[:0][:0]
PS I take pleasure in shooting things as well........