Angling Trust Forum

[Jaffa]

the fundamental problem is quite obvious, anglers blame the Angling Trust and before them all the old angling organisations, but the fault lies squarely with the angling fraternity

 

I have very little idea who you are, have not a clue why the AT apparently speaks for me and never knew angling had a "fraternity"?

 

dunno what the word means outside of low budget yank films about the importance of joining one..

 

But im at fault for not giving you £20?

 

Chris

[H.A.]

I don't have a clue who this "famous five" are, no nothing much about the history of "Angling representation" and why i'm supposed to care.

 

Ahhh ... you see, there are no famous five (your imagination or just Wilson and Arthur.co.uk?).

 

The guys and girls who want angling to continue and fish extraction to cease are the blokes (and goyles) who partake every weekend; keep the odd fish and enjoy seeing their kids use a crab-line off the local pier.

There are hundreds of thousands of them (yes, I mean that; and in the UK).

 

Now, I'm sorry, but the 'Gov' is not going to put paid to this, because they can't.

 

Kids will fish with bacon rind and bent pins .... it's a cultural thingy which began some while ago.

 

You can't stop that.

 

I hate to buy licences and pay landowners for the privilege, but common-sense rules where basic human rights are concerned and there are no restrictions on sea anglers, are there?

 

The Cappolots are winding you up.

 

This dreadful whining by commercials and Coppalots are grating my nerves.

 

[Bob Bradford]

I have very little idea who you are, have not a clue why the AT apparently speaks for me and never knew angling had a "fraternity"?

 

dunno what the word means outside of low budget yank films about the importance of joining one..

 

But im at fault for not giving you £20?

 

Chris

[/quote

 

Here is the definition of the word Fraternity;

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp...roups-of-people

 

I hope that helps, as for you giving me £20??? what are you on about??? the only thing we have in common it seems, is we know nothing about one another, and use this forum.

 

I would suggest a look on this site however; http://www.anglingtrust.net/

 

Take the time and trouble to read it's contents, particularly the recent newsletters, it will help you to understand how important the Angling Trust is to angling, this of course will only work if you have an open mind to them.

 

Regards Bob.

Edited January 3, 2010 by Bob Bradford

[Elton]

There is no mention of the fish removal byelaws on the AT website. Mark Lloyd has gone on the forum to ask members' views. That's fair enough, but what are the views of the AT board? Do they support the new byelaws, or do they oppose them? Do they think they were necessary, or not? And why? How did they respond the the initial consultation? You know, the one that was full of loaded questions that made it very difficult for anglers to oppose the proposed restrictions.

 

From http://anglingtrust.forumotion.net/open-de...e-laws-t36.htm

 

"The Angling Trust has been involved in the consultation leading up to the issuing of this draft..."

 

"We believe that these new regulations will help fight poaching and mass removal of fish..."

 

Draw your own conclusions.

[Bob Bradford]

This dreadful whining by commercials and Coppalots are grating my nerves.

 

 

The dreadful whining? that is an apt description of a handful of posters on here, and I would agree, it does grate on the nerves.

[Sportsman]

As Scottish Anglers we couldn't join if we wanted to so apparently we do not belong to the fraternity of anglers or are not part of the all anglers that the AT claims to represent.

Unfortunately, since you hi-jacked the ACA we can't join that either.

We can however send them the money but will not receive any of the so-called benefits of being members of the AT.

Well, you can shove it where the sun don't shine

[Bob Bradford]

As Scottish Anglers we couldn't join if we wanted to so apparently we do not belong to the fraternity of anglers or are not part of the all anglers that the AT claims to represent.

Unfortunately, since you hi-jacked the ACA we can't join that either.

We can however send them the money but will not receive any of the so-called benefits of being members of the AT.

Well, you can shove it where the sun don't shine

 

Thank you for your intelligent reply mate, if you took the time and trouble to read the newsletters I highlighted on the Angling Trust website earlier, and in particular the Fish legal newsletter, you will see your last post is ill informed, inaccruate and ignorant.

 

Regards Bob.

[Sportsman]

Thank you for your intelligent reply mate, if you took the time and trouble to read the newsletters I highlighted on the Angling Trust website earlier, and in particular the Fish legal newsletter, you will see your last post is ill informed, inaccruate and ignorant.

 

Regards Bob.

 

So your telling me that I (and anglers from Wales and Northern Ireland) can join the trust?

No, we can't.

 

We can join Fish Legal at a cost of 22.00 but we get none of the so called benefits of AT membership and yet you claim to represent all anglers.

 

If I join Fish Legal (which is part of the Angling Trust) could I be assured that not one penny of my 22.00 pound subscription would be used to support the Angling Trust in any way?

Edited January 3, 2010 by Sportsman

[wurzel]

The dreadful whining? that is an apt description of a handful of posters on here, and I would agree, it does grate on the nerves.

 

Hello Bob

 

 

The peasants are revolting, or is it the revolting peasants, you seem to be claiming the moral high ground.

Are you really that naive to think AT will change or influence government (defra) policy and their Recreational Sea Angling Strategy?

 

That handful of posters on here represent the views of all sea anglers I've spoken to.

 

I think the government will make it compulsory to join AT calling it a membership instead of a licence as I'm sure the Angling Trust was set up by or with government help to drag, kicking and screaming if need be, sea anglers into a similar control regime as fresh water anglers, and is also timed to tie in with the setting up of the net work of mpa's and ntz's in which anglers will be regulated on the same lines as in the US .

 

The very poor non result that the AT had over Article 47 will be the norm because the EU commission and the UK government can claim even higher moral ground useing the conservation card.

 

Perhaps you could tell me and I'm sure others would be interested, what roll does the ngo WWF have within the AT?

[Bob Bradford]

Sportsman, go on the Angling Trust website and ask them , I was invited on here to express my opinions, to offer a different perspective and perhaps get some anglers to have a re-think, I am not an agent of the Angling Trust, nor do I represent them in any way, shape or form, someone said this forum could do with some "Fresh Blood" I am beginging to think they meant "Sacreficial Blood", Is it any wonder the same small, handful of posters contribute to this part of the forum? I am not at your beck and call trying to answer questions you can quite easily find out for yourself, but here is one for free, the annual membership to the Angling Trust is £20, and not the £22 you state as fact.

 

 

Wurzel, the same reply applies to you, I resent the fact you think I will provide you with all the answers only for you to pick holes in them at a later date, if you are truly interested do as I do and ask the Angling Trust directly, if you can be bothered that is.

 

That's it from me, I do not desire nor need this systematic Internet bullying by anglers that should know better, I will leave you to your small,tiny piece of internet turf to whinge on, and on, and achieve precisely nothing,

 

 

Regards Bob.

 

PS, Thank you for re-instating me on your website Elton, I am sorry if you feel I wasted your time and effort.