rabg

it may seem fine to bang the drum to protect a single species or a couple ,namely bassand mullet,but if all stakeholders taking part in the consultations take the secular approach,then all marine users are in danger of losing out.if the canoeists,birdwatchers,anglers,surfers,divers etc all push their own agendas to the detriment of others it will make things very easy for those creating the rules.no united stance from ALL marine users equals more restrictions with little opposition. cheers rab

by whom may i ask leon ? it should be a good event,unfortunately i may be abroad on business at the time,but will be kept up to speed on how it goes.will be interesting to see the responses to the questions from the marine scotland team. cheers rab

none whatsoever elton ! steve makes a good point about actual membership.the oft quoted 13000 is the original figure i beleive,i doubt very much if it would stand up to scrutiny these days.take out the anglers that only join so they can take part in fish o mania (6000 ?)and it becomes a whole different story. i daresay some at the AT think the naysayers like myself are just anti AT,but the problem for many like myself is the lack of transparency ,if they cant even come clean with actual full paying members and recruitment numbers since the inception of the AT it doesnt look good.add in the underhand way the eel and tope legislation was dealt with ,plus the way it closed its own forum rather than answer pertinent questions from its own members and you have an organisation that cannot be trusted and seems to beleive it is there to dictate to anglers ,rather than listen to what they want. sea angling is made up of a huge range of disciplines and as such trying to come up with a one size fits all policy is near impossible.it would be far easier to say the only policy is to maintain the historical right to fish in our seas and access to them,something all sea anglers would agree on i think,than continue to promote things they have no control over,more and bigger fish for example,a great headline maker,but in real terms has no substance behind it,the fish will decide that one ,not people. cheers rab

well done in getting going lads,its a good looking website.you have had a fair bit of criticism on other sites,but im pretty sure if you stay true to the original format you have a good chance of big support in the long run,especially witrh the new marine legislation getting ever closer.without a doubt you are offering a viable alternative to the AT for sea anglers that know joining the AT would be to invite legislation and restriction that would have a major effect on how most go about their fishing. all the best rab

no worries elton and barry.i didnt realise there was a problem withe the facility to post below the articles. feel free to hold me in contempt,many do ! cheers rab

first up,just let me say im appalled that anglers net allow promotion of a political organisation on its front page without the right to reply on that same page. i trust anglers net will have the same headline space for someone like steve coppollo or barry luxton to write an article countering mark lloyds claims ? the response i wished to post in the comments section below mark lloyds rant are as follows :all i can say is thank god i live in scotland.how hypocritical is it to say the trust will only help the government collect data on RSA catches once the government tell them what the information will be used for,yet they wont disclose their own minutes arising from private meetings discussing proposals that have the potential to affect all sea anglers,NOT just their own members. Mr lloyd,feel free to represent anyone that pays you to represent them,but those are the ONLY anglers you are entitled to represent,you are not the representative body for all anglers ,whatever you may claim. once again the issues raised on internet forums are skirted around to paint a very different picture of what the actual problem is.due to the low numbers of sea angling members ,the AT has no mandate to represent sea angling as a whole,yet seeks to do so. situations like the eel legislation and how it was handled by the AT,and the fact that many AT high rollers are single species specialists or specimen hunters mean the policies being pushed by the AT are far removed from the outlook of many rank and file sea anglers ,and indeed could have a negative effect on how ordinary sea anglers go about their hobby.the views of the national anguila club,the national mullet club and B.A.S.S are all very well for the members of those groups,but they are a far cry from those of the ordinary angler. at this point in time ,the greatest threat to sea angling has nothing to do with getting more and bigger fish,the fish are doing a grand job of this themselves at the moment.the biggest threat is maintaining our historical right to fish without let or hindrance,and any group that takes sea angling into bed with governmental orgs has not done its homework,as the result will be restriction and added cost,with little or nothing in return. lastly,it would be nice if the AT would recognise other peoples right to criticise something they do not agree with.i accept fully the AT,s right to do as it pleases with regard to its members,but if its going to get involved in anything that has the potential to affect all sea anglers,then it has to accept the ones that are not members have a right to question,and expect answers. robert gallacher