Jump to content


- - - - -

ANGLING UNITY, IS IT POSSIBLE ?


  • Please log in to reply
266 replies to this topic

#21 Guest_Adrian_*

Guest_Adrian_*
  • Guests

Posted 18 July 2000 - 03:04 AM

I would like to think we could all get together, however it seems a long way off. There are so many specialisations within the sport whose followers have no interest in the leanings of others. The unity would be threatened when the organisation was asked to take a stand to protect a specific practice. For example, if livebaiting was to be used by the antis to publicly run us down (rather as they did with smoking Beagles to animal research), would the organisation fight or compromise ?.Other problems would arise if a certain grouping felt it was getting a second rate deal within the organisation.Remember the criticisms the NRA got for allegedly spending Coarse Anglers licence fees to the benefit of Salmon anglers ?.

Big bodies tend to get remote and then face a clamour to be devolved or made more local.

I agree with the earlier poster regarding apathy, I suppose some of it is to be expected, after all, do we not go fishing to get away from the pressures of life ?.It is also in the British nature to amble along trusting that all will be ok.

I think the only thing that would cause unity would be a GENUINE threat to the sport, not just a few sad, smelly bunny-huggers. See how the countyrside alliance got together behind hunting.

Adrian

#22 Guest_BUDGIE_*

Guest_BUDGIE_*
  • Guests

Posted 18 July 2000 - 03:09 AM

Yes,Due to our inherent apathy we need some one to fight on our behalf.The only problem is that one representitive body would never carry the same political clout as thousands of individuals lobbying the powers to be with the same message.Maybe in the near future the WWW could provide an easy ?lazy mans way of registering his oppinions with the authorities?

#23 Guest_Gaffer_*

Guest_Gaffer_*
  • Guests

Posted 18 July 2000 - 03:18 AM

Steve, I see what you are saying, but just the thought of it will have anglers against it.
As for an unbrella organisation, it seems so far off with so many disagreeing on just the fundamentle issues.
With this in mind many would rather bury their heads in the sand and have hastle free fishing in their own little world.
I know this isn't the attitude to have but most anglers think this way.
Gaffer.

#24 Guest_Elton_*

Guest_Elton_*
  • Guests

Posted 18 July 2000 - 03:21 AM

Originally posted by BUDGIE:
Maybe in the near future the WWW could provide an easy ?lazy mans way of registering his oppinions with the authorities?


As quickly as that happens, the powers that be will find a way of ignoring it.

I believe an MP has to reply to any letter written to him/her by a member of a constituency - I doubt the same applies for email or, if it does, I'm sure it'll change when they get a deluge of ready filled in letters, whereby the user merely has to enter their email address and hit 'send'.

Tight lines,

Elton



------------------
Elton Murphy
Anglers' Net
http://www.anglersnet.co.uk

#25 Guest_Ray Walton_*

Guest_Ray Walton_*
  • Guests

Posted 18 July 2000 - 03:47 AM

Anyone know why the Grayling Society are not endorsing SACG as well as the Barbel Society? Posted Image

#26 Guest_Steve Randles_*

Guest_Steve Randles_*
  • Guests

Posted 18 July 2000 - 04:25 AM

It occurs to me that we all want the same(near enough) thing, but none can see it happening. I find this a bit strange. If we all wanted a new job but couln't see it happening would we all just sit at home and give up? I doubt it! Most of us would keep trying until we had the job we wanted.For without it we would not have the money to buy all those nice things that we all want and in some cases need.Why then is it different when it comes to the sport of angling. Fox hunting IS going to be banned within the next few years, a past-time involving some of the richest and most influential people in the country, if they cannot stop this inebitable fact , what chance does fishing have, sadley none .So you have to ask yourself "for how much longer do I wish to fish for" because this will be the only question you will have left in the future, doom and gloom I know but we must at some stage face this fact.
It is time for a change I believe because if we leave it too long the wolves WILL be at our door before we know it and we need to be ready for that when it happens not starting to do something about it at the time because the arguing anglers are going to have to do to sort this out needs doing now.How would it look if we where arguing between each seperate faction in angling at the time when we need to be preserving an dprotecting our sport. Comments such as "they can't even agree between themselves" spring to mind.

Get round the table now, dont wait for someone or somebody to make us do it!

Steve Randles

#27 Guest_RobStubbs_*

Guest_RobStubbs_*
  • Guests

Posted 18 July 2000 - 01:03 PM

I find it a shame when people say about angling not being under serious threat. How serious does it have to get ? There is at least one active anti-angling group and potentially at least one more in the wings(with massive clout). Angling needs unity and with that some degree of power in a combined single voice. This needs to be in place before angling gets targetted more seriously and not after - it'll be too late then.

An angling governing body has been on the cards for a long time and angling groups have been meeting specifically for this purpose for at least the last few years. At this moment in time no-one can say what form it will take but it is required. If nothing else angling will not be taken seriously by the sports council until it speaks with a single voice and meetings with groups including the SACG and government ministers have reiterated that sentiment.

Rob.

#28 Guest_The Gimp_*

Guest_The Gimp_*
  • Guests

Posted 18 July 2000 - 01:56 PM

Originally posted by Steve Randles:
It occurs to me that we all want the same(near enough) thing, but none can see it happening. .How would it look if we where arguing  between each seperate faction in angling at the time when we need to be preserving an dprotecting our sport. Comments such as "they can't even agree between themselves" spring to mind.

Get round the table now, dont wait for someone or somebody to make us do it!

Steve Randles


Steve

couldn't agree more, I think that's what Ray was hitting on earlier with the SAGC, that's only one example but can you see this umbrella organization taking all the others under its wing smoothly? No, it's not going to be easy. Doesn't mean we have to give up though, as you say, but it sure would help if we didn't insist on being so disparate right now!

There are a few other points. First we also have to be thinking in terms of what angling BRINGS, not just what we want from it, ie fun and lots of fish. By this I mean what does angling do for the general public and countryside. Most (but not all) of us adopt some kind of conservation standpoint, we try to put fish welfare first, we (via rod licences and working parties etc) keep waterside and water environments clean and in a good state. If we're not able to show that we are united and give as well as take, we'll stand a much better chance of surviving.

This also means there are certain issues around which we will ALL (and not just those of us who feel like it!) have to agrre on and practice, especially regarding fish welfare and litter.

#29 Guest_stoney_*

Guest_stoney_*
  • Guests

Posted 19 July 2000 - 02:56 AM

As an ex pistol shooter, i know what its like to lose ones sport. So i think Steve Randles has hit it on the head, we are next in line, after fox hunting.
I agree we need all of us anglers to get together, pay people to fight our corner, answer all attacks made towards us, and have a print out of every angler in the land, and dump it in the prime ministers lap, and say, are you really going to upset this lot.
But once you ask anglers for a couple of quid, to protect their sport, well you only need to ask the ACA about that. And what about the financial support of the SACG, well its bloody pityfull. (before anyone asks, yes my syndicate does support the SACG, its the only one though ). thats all for now, but this subject gets the blood pressure going.
Allan

#30 Guest_Graham E_*

Guest_Graham E_*
  • Guests

Posted 19 July 2000 - 03:15 AM

I am pleased that the last poster agreed with my earlier point regarding paying for the expertise.
Like many of the other posters I have wide experience Sales/marketing/mngmnt etc. And whether we like it or not The controlling Organisation needs to be run as a business by skilled professionals.
This doesn't mean fishing as a sport is a business. It means that our representatives cannot continue to operate in a semi professional unpaid part time way.
Given the demography within our sport, Sponsorship for a ruling body should not be difficult. The angling mailing alone list must be worth over 50k. Add to this group discount purchase initiatives with major suppliers etc. and pcentage of savings going to the Organisation etc. It should be easy to self fund.