Jump to content

Update on Angling Trust


Bob Bradford

Recommended Posts

Can't be perfect all the time Elton, even i cock up, only sometimes though. :)

 

 

 

just a little bit.

Free to choose apart from the ones where the trust poked their nose in. Common eel. tope. Bass and sea bream. All restricted.


New for 2016 TAT are the main instigators for the demise of the u k bass charter boat industry, where they went screaming off to parliament and for the first time assisting so called angling gurus set up bass take bans with the e u using rubbish exaggerated info collected by ices from anglers, they must be very proud.

Upgrade, the door has been closed with regards to anglers being linked to the e u superstate and the failed c f p. So TAT will no longer need to pay monies to the EAA anymore as that org is no longer relevant to the u k . Goodbye to the europeon anglers alliance and pathetic restrictions from the e u.

Angling is better than politics, ban politics from angling.

Consumer of bass. where is the evidence that the u k bass stock need angling trust protection. Why won't you work with your peers instead of castigating them. They have the answer.

Recipie's for mullet stew more than welcomed.

Angling sanitation trust and kent and sussex sea anglers org delete's and blocks rsa's alternative opinion on their face book site. Although they claim to rep all.

new for 2014. where is the evidence that the south coast bream stock need the angling trust? Your campaign has no evidence. Why won't you work with your peers, the inshore under tens? As opposed to alienating them? Angling trust failed big time re bait digging, even fish legal attempted to intervene and failed, all for what, nothing.

Looks like the sea angling reps have been coerced by the ifca's to compose sea angling strategy's that the ifca's at some stage will look at drafting into legislation to manage the rsa, because they like wasting tax payers money. That's without asking the rsa btw. You know who you are..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 132
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Thanks for your explanation, Steve. I'm not qualified to judge if it's correct as I do very little sea angling today as it's nowhere good as it was in my youth, despite the good winter for codling in Kent.

 

Turning to your quote above, I'd have thought you'd have a lot more chance of influencing the members of the Angling Trust from within. How else can you reach sufficient members, all of whom have a vote whilst you don't? After all, very few of them will be reading this Forum or any other for that matter.

 

Like Elton, I keep hearing how disgruntled people should join, (whatever organisation), and change thing, etc. The other one is the classic, no pay, no say. In theory, it all makes sense, but in practice it just doesn't work. I have belonged to all the sea angling representative bodie at some time or other. The NFSA, SACN and BASS. I've paid my money, (except in the case of the SACN, which is just a free email network), and I've tried to change things. The truth is, the important decisions still come down to the same one or two people. If you don't agree with them, you get no say anyway, pay or not! In fact, it's worse than that. If you don't agree with them, you are often viewed as a trouble maker, or similarly undesirable character. The fact that you just want what's best for angling is too much for them to accept - if your views don't tally with their own.

 

But, hey, don't take my word for it. The exteremely low membership numbers for these organisations, even combined, says it all.

 

As for joining and standing for election. :lol: Unless the Angling Trust allowed all sea anglers, member or not, to elect the person who represents them; (after all, the Trust claims to represent all sea anglers, not just their members), and unless they can can give me a cast iron 10 year contract, plus match my current salary and pension, payable at the age of 55, I'm not interested! :P

Edited by Steve Coppolo

DRUNK DRIVERS WRECK LIVES.

 

Don't drink and drive.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

May be so. But that's the way it is.

 

The reason given is that it was too time consuming and an inefficient waste of resources speaking to loads of fractured angling bodies all saying different things.

 

Sorry, Steve, just noticed the above. If there were loads of fractured angling bodies, all saying different things, that is a good indication of how diverse a bunch we all are. Our needs are different. My needs as a freshwater angler vary from my needs as a sea angler - and I'm just one person!

 

If this is too much for our government to bear, then what hope have we that they might address the needs of all of us? Having one single body to talk to might make their lives easier, but will it be better for us? They can please one group and tick the box, but in doing so they will invariably be upsetting, or ignoring, another.

 

I'm not claiming I know what the answer is, just pointing out that one size will never fit all.

Edited by Steve Coppolo

DRUNK DRIVERS WRECK LIVES.

 

Don't drink and drive.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lots of sea anglers are signing up - these forums are not indicative of

opinion.

 

However, it's good to know what the critics are saying and you do a great

job defending us.

 

All best,

 

Mark"

 

Well thats a really reassuring statement. :rolleyes:

It seems that the "we know whats best for you" attitude is still alive and well.

If that sums up the Angling Trust's policy, they can stick their membership.

I may not be able to stop them screwing up my fishing, but I do not intend to pay for the privilege.

 

The sad thing is that the ACA is in with this lot, I always felt my subscription to them (which is no more) was money well invested.

"I gotta go where its warm, I gotta fly to saint somewhere "

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, Steve, just noticed the above. If there were loads of fractured angling bodies, all saying different things, that is a good indication of how diverse a bunch we all are. Our needs are different. My needs as a freshwater angler vary from my needs as a sea angler - and I'm just one person!

 

If this is too much for our government to bear, then what hope have we that they might address the needs of all of us? Having one single body to talk to might make their lives easier, but will it be better for us? They can please one group and tick the box, but in doing so they will invariably be upsetting, or ignoring, another.

 

I'm not claiming I know what the answer is, just pointing out that one size will never fit all.

 

Yet it is ok for devolution then, in the uk we have three different bodies controlling the fishing, welsh, scottish and the british, yet the policies appear pretty much the same. Whats worse, split anglers or split admin. I know what one costs us more money. Then we have the eu controlling all them, yup pretty much a nice cosey management team. And what they are doing is rubbing the anglers up the wrong way, without actually achieving anything. Amazing really, or is it. Took them how many years to come up with a plan to save the common, europeon eel, after ices said urgent action was required. It was definatly less than ten years, not sure by how much though.

Free to choose apart from the ones where the trust poked their nose in. Common eel. tope. Bass and sea bream. All restricted.


New for 2016 TAT are the main instigators for the demise of the u k bass charter boat industry, where they went screaming off to parliament and for the first time assisting so called angling gurus set up bass take bans with the e u using rubbish exaggerated info collected by ices from anglers, they must be very proud.

Upgrade, the door has been closed with regards to anglers being linked to the e u superstate and the failed c f p. So TAT will no longer need to pay monies to the EAA anymore as that org is no longer relevant to the u k . Goodbye to the europeon anglers alliance and pathetic restrictions from the e u.

Angling is better than politics, ban politics from angling.

Consumer of bass. where is the evidence that the u k bass stock need angling trust protection. Why won't you work with your peers instead of castigating them. They have the answer.

Recipie's for mullet stew more than welcomed.

Angling sanitation trust and kent and sussex sea anglers org delete's and blocks rsa's alternative opinion on their face book site. Although they claim to rep all.

new for 2014. where is the evidence that the south coast bream stock need the angling trust? Your campaign has no evidence. Why won't you work with your peers, the inshore under tens? As opposed to alienating them? Angling trust failed big time re bait digging, even fish legal attempted to intervene and failed, all for what, nothing.

Looks like the sea angling reps have been coerced by the ifca's to compose sea angling strategy's that the ifca's at some stage will look at drafting into legislation to manage the rsa, because they like wasting tax payers money. That's without asking the rsa btw. You know who you are..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, society has to do what the Government wants now? They are there to serve us, not the other way around.

 

I used to be an idealist too. Now I'm a realist.

 

I don't suffer fools gladly and so could never be a politician simply because all too many politicians are fools. :D

 

However I do appreciate that politics is the art of the possible.

Wingham Specimen Coarse & Carp Syndicates www.winghamfisheries.co.uk Beautiful, peaceful, little fished gravel pit syndicates in Kent with very big fish. 2017 Forum Fish-In Sat May 6 to Mon May 8. Articles http://www.anglersnet.co.uk/steveburke.htm Index of all my articles on Angler's Net

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd love to know who the so-called 'Friends of Steve Copollo' are, and who the 'Sea angling journalists' are that have been called in to help the AT dig themselves out of the huge hole they are in?

For my mind the AT is yet another case of diving into something you know nothing about both undermanned and underfunded. I would have thought that consulting the UK sea angling press and key journalists would have been the first thing that was done before the 'glitzy' launch of a non entity. The AT should have done their homework before announcing how brilliant they are and the fact that they are 'The voice of UK angling' - they may have saved themselves a lot of future work and embarrassment. The fact that they have only just started thinking about doing something to help sea anglers as a result of constant bombardment from a few individuals has done them no favours at all.

Granted, I'll give them a few months to see if they can pull something out of the bag worthy of my membership fee, but as of yet all I can see happening is another fumbled mess!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd love to know who the so-called 'Friends of Steve Copollo' are, and who the 'Sea angling journalists' are that have been called in to help the AT dig themselves out of the huge hole they are in?

 

Can we assume from that question that the editor of Boat Fishing Monthly wasn't one of them?

Anglers' Net Shopping Partners - Please Support Your Forum

CLICK HERE for all your Amazon purchases - books, photography equipment, DVD's and more!

CLICK HERE for Go Outdoors. HUGE discounts!

 

FOLLOW ANGLERS' NET ON TWITTER- CLICK HERE - @anglersnet

PLEASE 'LIKE' US ON FACEBOOK - CLICK HERE

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dave B and others, I really do not think you are being at all fair, Mark Lloyd comes from the old ACA, they had nothing to do with all the bad history from previous failed representative's, the ACA's record under Mark is superb, this will continue under the new Fish Legal, BUT Mark has taken over as CEO of both Fish Legal (his old job) and Angling Trust, he knows better than most the huge problems involved, but with his track record, things will change for the better, the Trust was only launched in January 2009, getting all the different organisations to agree to unity was a major achievement alone, this was down to Mark and a few others, all he is asking for is your financial support via £20 membership and TIME.

Mark was not responsible for went on before ,so to judge him on that is totally unfair and wrong, he IS responsible for what goes on now and in the future, so it is only correct he is judged on that.

 

I posted a private e-mail sent to me from Mark to show just how quickly he responds and illustrate how accessible he is to Angling Trust members, his reply to me was clearly not a measured ,articulate response, more of a friend to a friend reply, with no thought to public consumption, he had no idea I would post it on here, and I wish I had not, because the damage I have caused through my own stupid , naive actions is immeasurable, I have apologised to the man, he simply does not deserve the flack he is receiving on this matter.

 

Any man has two choices to make regarding the Angling Trust, he can either join and make his views known or opt out of joining and have no one to represent them, but to criticize the new governing body after just one month because of failed previous organisations and their miserable history is utterly wrong and unfair, the very least any of you can do is give it some time.

I am a match angler .....not an anti-Christ!!!]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not having a dig at Mark personally, from what I have read on here the poor chap is up to his eyeballs. And yes I agree that time will tell as far as how the AT is concerned. The thing that I am annoyed about is the fact that we have Article 47 looming over our heads as we speak and we do not have 'time'.

When the AT was 'officially' launched in January, they should have had things in place and ready to go - especially on the sea angling side of things. It's like Nissan launching a new range of cars - but oh, you'll have to wait six months because we haven't got any doors or headlights sorted for them yet!

Why announce that you are the new voice of UK sea angling when you're clearly not! That is where the AT has accrued a lot of bad feeling from the sea angling public. We've know about AT since November 2007, and I forget exactly when it was that the NFSA threw their ten grand into the pot, I think it was mid October 2008. So what was happening during the months in-between? Why didn't they appoint a sea fishing representative? Did they know that Aritcle 47 was looming?

We need the support now, not in six month's time, and none of us can see where this help is going to come from. It certainly isn't going to come from one poor fella who already has far too much work to do.

I just feel that if the AT were at all serious about sea anglers they would have got their act together before, or at least as soon as, the new 'supergroup' was launched.

I, like many others, am frustrated and worried that we may not even need an angling voice in 12 month's time if things pan out as the loons in Brussels desire.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We and our partners use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences, repeat visits and to show you personalised advertisements. By clicking “I Agree”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies. However, you may visit Cookie Settings to provide a controlled consent.