After reading the Zythophile article that Richard linked to (<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="
zythophile.wordpress.com/2010/11/11/mayb...and-dropped-the-ale/">
zythophile.wordpress.com/2010/11 ... d-the-ale/), I think CAMRA's stance on cask breathers makes even more sense.
He points out that the near demise of cask ale occurred because of quality issues and that it was easier for pubs to maintain good quality in bottled and kegged products. CAMRA almost certainly is aware of this history and undoubtedly realizes that in order for cask ale to be perceived well in the marketplace that a focus must be made on ensuring that pubs treat is properly. -I think it's also an important issue for the breweries who don't want the pubs ruining their beer and THEIR good name.
If I were CAMRA, I'd want to focus on putting in place rules and incentives that make ensuring the quality of the beer in the pubs easy; saying "you must go through a cask within 3 days" is a pretty easy way to do that.
Granted it's been several decades since CAMRA started their mission and such stringent rules might not be necessary especially as the technology exists to keep the beer better longer if pubs don't abuse it.
I'm not defending everything CAMRA does -telling foreign breweries to serve their beer in a manner other than the one that it was originally intended for is certainly questionable, but the strict rules about dispense methods and to pressure make more sense in the historical context of British Cask Ale.
Adam