Unity - At Last!

[barry luxton]

Is Keith a member of staff for them? I just had a quick look on their site, but don't know who the staff members are.

 

hoping he ain't a member of the new trust, if he is he is in a nice position to cause a lot of sea anglers not to bother.

[Elton]

http://www.northnorfolknews.co.uk/content/...3A16%3A24%3A900

 

http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/content/Spo...3A13%3A30%3A980

 

Seems Norfolk aren't too keen!

 

And the Welsh don't even get a look in? Is this true?

 

http://www.flyforums.co.uk/showthread.php?p=343227

[Vagabond]

It (the salaries bill) is a staggering £525,000 on a projected income of around £1.2 million if the facts on the website are correct.

 

When anglers requested the Trust to elaborate further and produce a breakdown of the payroll structure, the top man Mark Lloyd said details were confidential.

 

That's not a good start.

 

Twice in my lifetime the ACA have been involved in financial scandals that bore at least some of the hallmarks of embezzlement.

 

As I said at the time of the James debacle, MUCH more transparency in the accounting procedures is needed and they wont get my money until it is.

 

I have no objection whatsoever to the top brass of AT or FL being paid the rate for the job if their performance justifies it - I just want to know what that rate is.

 

.....and the third link (if it has the facts right) ought to sound warnings to every Welsh (and by analogy Scottish) angler in the UK.

 

BTW Another poster said "whoever chose the name Fish Legal ought to be shot. It sounds like a bunch of ambulance-chasing lawyers" I must agree - what message does that title convey ? A title incorporating the phrase "Pure Rivers" is to my mind essential.

Edited January 16, 2009 by Vagabond

[barry luxton]

Unity at last, don't know at what cost though or is it with the exculsion of sea anglers. As i thought here we have the trust whealing out the big guns to promote the new trust and this guy is advocating licences/registration, bag limits for sea anglers, at the very least, thanks friend, but no thanks. They have shot them selves in the foot already.

 

http://www.skysports.com/blogs/blog_story/...4798711,00.html

Edited January 16, 2009 by barry luxton

[Elton]

Unity at last, don't know at what cost though or is it with the exculsion of sea anglers. As i thought here we have the trust whealing out the big guns to promote the new trust and this guy is advocating licences/registration, bag limits for sea anglers, at the very least, thanks friend, but no thanks. They have shot them selves in the foot already.

 

http://www.skysports.com/blogs/blog_story/...4798711,00.html

 

Hi Barry,

 

As far as I know, Keith is an individual supporter of the Angling Trust, not a spokesman, so we shouldn't take his views as representative of the new company.

 

I do have some sympathy for them in this regard, as lots of "enthusiastic supporters" seem to be doing them more harm than good in their attempts to bully people into joining and are definitely muddying the waters. Surely, the whole idea of having a new professional body is that they will have professional people to sway those of us who've got a few doubts? The last thing they probably need is a bunch of well meaning individuals spouting off. (I'm not referring to Keith here, by the way, but the various internet warriors who've taken on some kind of new crusade).

 

There is a Keith Arthur posting as FBlues here who claims to have "drafted the proposals that Martin Salter took to government to get the bag limits proposals in the new marine fisheries bill". The thread makes interesting reading. Whether it's the same person, I have no idea. If it is true, and one individual can currently influence Government thinking whilst potentially affecting millions of us, then it is a case for an organisation like the Angling Trust to exist.

[barry luxton]

Hi Elton,

 

Thanks for the link i have only scanned it at the mo but, ouch if it is the same Keith.

 

Quote: If you really want to know, it was me that drafted the proposals that Martin Salter took to government to get the bag limits proposals in the new marine fisheries bill. I did that as an individual. End quote.

 

Definatly need something to counter this guy, i agree on that.

[Elton]

So sorry you feal this way Elton, I would have thought that several reasons to join would be obvious.

 

Never ever be surprised at what poeple do...or don't do

 

I have been away from this site for some time, it may be a good while before my return.

 

Regards

 

John Hepworth

 

John,

 

I wasn't going to bother reply to this, but as you've seen fit to slag me off on another website, I may as well humour you.

 

If the reasons are so obvious, I'd love for you, personally, to elaborate on them. Most of my fishing recently has been at sea, but I hope to do a lot more river and carp fishing this year, too, so if you could explain the specific benefits for me, I'd appreciate it.

 

I want to join the Angling Trust, but I don't want to join just because people like you tell me I have to. I want to know, clearly, what/who their policies, plans and personnel are. What I don't want to do is give my support (the £20 is neither here nor there) to an organisation that has just been set up to provide jobs for people, some of whom could potentially cause more damage to certain areas of our sport than good. I also want to know that there is total clarity in their operation. All they seem to have right now, after all these years of preparation, is a fairly shallow sales pitch and magnificent claims of grandeur in the press. I had expected a lot more, to be honest. I really expected them to come out fighting, especially as sea angling seems to be under the cosh so badly right now.

 

The way I see it, as it stands, the people who are potentially getting the most out of this right now are the Government. Controlling angling and anglers will be quite easy for them from 2009. I want to know how they're going to combat serious issues, not how I can get Clubcard points on my maggots.

 

I have utmost admiration for just about everyone involved in the AT, have always published their press releases instantly and promoted them via these forums, but I would like certain reassurances as an individual before I join. I have reservations and refuse to follow like a sheep whilst those reservations are in my head.

 

Also, even if I do join, I want to know 100% that non-members are given the means to communicate via the Angling Trust. Otherwise, I fail to see how they can claim to represent all anglers fairly.

 

Please bear in mind that this is only my own view. I would not dare to sway anyone else's opinion and have not done so. I'm not going to get embroiled in any more discussion on the matter. I'll keep checking their website and the press and when I think their the organisation for me, I'll send them my details, along with the cheque.

 

I'm only one person - I'm sure they can survive without my £20 for a few weeks

 

One last thing..hopefully. Where does all this "this could be our last chance" and "they're all we've got, so you'd better join" stuff come from? What a load of tosh. If the Angling Trust fails, it will be because angling didn't want what they offered. That doesn't mean that something better won't come along. Ask Yahoo about Google. In the meantime, those wanting to recruit on their behalf would be better advised to concentrate on the positives, surely, such as, the history of ACA court case wins?

 

Tight lines,

 

Elton

[Weary1]

“What I don't want to do is give my support (the £20 is neither here nor there) to an organisation that has just been set up to provide jobs for people, some of whom could potentially cause more damage to certain areas of our sport than good”.

 

“I have utmost admiration for just about everyone involved in the AT ”

 

...and all in the same breath. DO please make up your mind, Elton.

[Elton]

“What I don't want to do is give my support (the £20 is neither here nor there) to an organisation that has just been set up to provide jobs for people, some of whom could potentially cause more damage to certain areas of our sport than good”.

 

“I have utmost admiration for just about everyone involved in the AT ”

 

...and all in the same breath. DO please make up your mind, Elton.

 

Why don't you pick sentences at random, quote them willy-nilly and try to make them read as something totally different, whilst avoiding answering any questions (which everyone seems good at these days), just to stir up crap, John?

 

I said that I needed clarification on certain issues before I joined the Angling Trust, John, so that I knew what I was joining and whose wages my money was helping to pay.

 

I also said that I have the utmost admiration for just about everyone involved in the Angling Trust, John. Which I do.

 

I said a lot of other stuff either side of those quotes, because I thought you gave a toss, John, but you obviously don't. You've decided that everyone must join because you think it's right to do so and, if they don't, they are a disgrace for even daring to ask questions.

 

Someone like Bob Bradford, I can admire. He has listened to other angler's views, not just asked for them, and responded accordingly. There's a man who many anglers on here, despite opposing his views, would gladly call a fellow angler. I know I would. He may even have swayed a few people on here. If the Angling Trust is made up of people like him, it will certainly be a force to be reckoned with.

 

I don't know why I'm bothering with this reply, mind you. It's quite apparent that you only hear the bits you want to hear.

 

There you go, throw those words up in their air, see where they land, shuffle them about a bit and quote them to say whatever you want them to say. And put me off standing alongside you in any organisation a bit more.

[Weary1]

I'm only questioning your apparent hostility Elton, especially as you choose the quote the most anti angling 'angling correspondent' in the entire angling world.