Angling Trust Forum

[barry luxton]

The AT does not support the RSA Strategy, Bags Limits, Sea Rod Licence, if you look at the AT Strategy you will see the truth. Coming back with, forget the AT Strategy, Manifesto,

 

You say the fishing is great, some people are having the best fishing in years, this is another one of your quick responses when you have no way of refuting the facts. There may well be one or two areas that have had a better year than last year, but none are having better years than ten years ago Steve, NONE. We are losing our sport and we have to do something about it now.

 

Am I wrong again Steve, are all the experts wrong Steve, are there plenty of fish in the see. Are you too arrogant to admit that you are wrong Steve. Where are the 30lb Cods Steve, where are the 15lb Bass Steve, Where are the 4lb Sole Steve, the 30lb Turbots, the 30lb Blonde Rays, 15lb Spurdogs, 6lb Bream. They are scattered in ones and twos across the country, we are losing the fight and you want us to do nothing! Before you come back and say they are localised due to their habitat, Rubbish......... they are not even localised Steve and nor are the main populations because they don't have a chance to spawn.

 

Hi Reg, i will wait until you have the direct links, no hurry as you can see this topic hasn't run out of steam, good healthy one actually.

When can we expect some action re the above Reg. When you go and purchace something, to draw you in you need enticement. For the A T to say when there is enough interest, persons on board all will be well is not enough inducement for me. Having me own company for many years, i know that you have to spend to accumulate, so it may well be that the directors will need to do just that and prove the proof really is in the pudding and not the reverse. Don't matter how good the manifesto looks, action does speak louder than words, trust me. To argue that the purchacer, if you don't buy than it's all your fault when it goes wrong, is not really a healthy one in my mind. Inducement, not threats. When they opened shop a year ago, i made the decision to see what they can do.

 

So to date, you have to admit the rsa have gone backwards instead of forwards re the A T surly. Thats a mighty big wish list you have put up Reg, think the A T are upto it. The eu, defra,ea and the minister and those beforehand haven't achieved it and whats on the horizon with them are restrictions etc, without the carrot, can the A T, bearing in mind that during the last year there has been no forward movement, only restrictions.

[Yido]

Hi Reg, i will wait until you have the direct links, no hurry as you can see this topic hasn't run out of steam, good healthy one actually.

When can we expect some action re the above Reg. When you go and purchace something, to draw you in you need enticement. For the A T to say when there is enough interest, persons on board all will be well is not enough inducement for me. Having me own company for many years, i know that you have to spend to accumulate, so it may well be that the directors will need to do just that and prove the proof really is in the pudding and not the reverse. Don't matter how good the manifesto looks, action does speak louder than words, trust me. To argue that the purchacer, if you don't buy than it's all your fault when it goes wrong, is not really a healthy one in my mind. Inducement, not threats. When they opened shop a year ago, i made the decision to see what they can do.

 

So to date, you have to admit the rsa have gone backwards instead of forwards re the A T surly. Thats a mighty big wish list you have put up Reg, think the A T are upto it. The eu, defra,ea and the minister and those beforehand haven't achieved it and whats on the horizon with them are restrictions etc, without the carrot, can the A T, bearing in mind that during the last year there has been no forward movement, only restrictions.

 

 

Hi Barry, I agree with you, the AT need to earn the TRUST, they need to communicate with anglers better, they need to gain support. The AT have said that the first year was purely about setting up the orgainzation, the money raised was spent on this, which left very little to spend on communication. This year, they say, is the year when things will start to happen and there will be better understanding and improved support, I hope they are right. I have my own company too Barry, so we both now that running a business is not easy or cheap.

 

If you want further proof of why we should stand together and fight for our sport, take a look at this link http://www.londongateway.com/portal/page/portal/LONDON GATEWAY/Home

 

This was emailed to me yestureday by Mike Heylin and Leon Roskilly

 

Our Government, determined to force restrictions on anglers for the better good of our marine bio-diversity are nothing but hypocrites. To make this post short. They are going to build a new deep water docking for the new breed of huge container ships in the Thames. They intend to dredge up thousands of tonnes of seabed and dump it as a base for the building work. The industrial polution from 200 years of industry, that is contained in the seabed, will destroy not only the marine bio-diversity in the Thames, but travel right through the river to the smalliest of freshwater streams. So anglers in this area can forget about the BASS and TOPE fishing in the Thames for the next 20 years. To make things worse, right next to this site is a major spawning ground for the Dover Sole, and they intend to start right in the middle to the spawning season.

 

Great move My Brown

[Worms]

Hi Barry, I agree with you, the AT need to earn the TRUST, they need to communicate with anglers better, they need to gain support. The AT have said that the first year was purely about setting up the orgainzation, the money raised was spent on this, which left very little to spend on communication. This year, they say, is the year when things will start to happen and there will be better understanding and improved support,

It's a real shame that they didn't listen to their own advice then. Instead of liaising with the EA after (allegedly) contacting their members over the coarse fish and eels removal legislation, why didn't they just keep quiet until they'd got an organisation that spoke with one voice. If you're going to set up a national organisation then surely a means of communication with the people that you are hoping to represent is the first thing you set up? Wouldn't it also be wise to get a decent membership that could inform the organisation of the views they would like to be represented before proclaiming their "National Governing Body" status and dictating the views that the AT committees held was that of the average angler?

 

As a non-member I sent a lot of e-mails to Mark Lloyd asking what the AT stance was on a variety of issues. He wasn't too forthcoming regarding replies!

 

As a non-specialist river angler and a sea angler as well. I have waited to see what the AT can do for me. Unfortunately the only things that they have been active in so far are to support restrictive legislation. Ok, not everybody eats coarse fish and those that do are usually tarred with an Eastern European "eat every fish you catch" brush but, that is not the AT sticking up for all anglers.

 

The advice by the AT to support the MCS by naming areas to be listed as conservation areas does not fill me with joy either. A long time ago on this forum I was having a "lively" debate with some experienced sea anglers and I suggested (before the AT) that anglers talking with the MCS to find common ground would be a good idea. Talking being the operative word, not just putting a link up to a site that mentions potential restrictions on RSAs!

 

The AT seem to have jumped on several bandwagons at once. The problem is, nobody bothered to ask in which direction they were going.

 

I don't necessarily agree with all of your views (as regards the AT forum) but I do admire you for coming on to the AN forum to say your bit. It's a shame that Mark Lloyd and more of the "management" don't seem too interested in facing the flak from we mere mortal non-members.

 

I like to shop around for a bargain and, if I'm going to spend my money on something I like to see that I get value for money. If I want a new reel for instance I will trawl the internet and ask questions on fora as to suitability, reliability etc. before I hand over my cash. In my opinion so far, the AT reel is cheap, badly finished and likely to let you down when you've got a big one on!............No thanks, not yet but, in the meantime take it off the market, fix the problems and then re-market it.

 

Nick

[Dave B]

Dave,

 

I think I must of misunderstood your question on the AT advertising. I was reffering to the full page campaign add, the one that says: The average angler spends £670 a year on fishing......the best anglers spend £20 more. Sorry

 

Yes, I agree with you on this subject, the AT has made a mess of communication, why, I don't know Dave, I'm not an AT rep. But Dave, you are missing the point of my argument so I shall say it again.

 

You are in a position where everyday anglers who subscribe to the BFM, like me, want to see an editor who does not resort to childish stupid, sarcastic comments on a forum, if thats what you really think of anglers, do yourself a favour and keep it to yourself. You know what I would of said if I were in your shoes?

 

Something like this,

 

Well Reg, I had a moment of lapse and got caught up in the friendly banter on this forum, Sorry mate.

 

I am an angler Dave, just like you, friendly banter is at the very heart of all friendships, at the very heart of all anglers, we take the mick out of people behind their backs, sometimes to their face if they know the person realizes it to be a joke. Your an angler Dave, but you are also an editor of a national magazine, try to remember that.

 

 

Okay Reg, so maybe the last part of my comment on the 'What do I get for my £20' post was a bit sarcastic, but I stand by everything else I've said on here.

 

When you say the AT have spent an entire year 'setting up the organisation' what exactly do you mean? I thought they had a launch 'party' last year to launch the organisation? You don't turn the ignition key before you've put fuel in the boat do you? So why 'launch' and organisation that isn't ready to be launched? I'm sorry Reg, but that argument stinks. There's no excuse for cutting out the sea fishing media, which in turn cuts out most of the sea angling population, from being involved with what's happening to our sport.

 

They were quick to get involved with the coarse side of things - and at the time everyone was saying, for months on end, that the AT thought of sea anglers as second class citizens. It was only when Article 47 reared it's ugly head that the AT actually acknowledged that we sea anglers exist!

 

I do hope that communication gets better between the AT and the sea fishing media this year, but I'm not holding my breath. I understand that the organisation lacks funds and is short on manpower - but in my view they've gone about it all wrong. It doesn't take that long to scribble down 500 words every month and e-mail it to three magazines, now does it? You've probably written over 3000 words in the past week on this forum! Surely someone at the AT could have spared 20 mins to let sea anglers know what was going on?

 

We're fast reaching the point of 'Too little too late' Reg, There has been a hell of a lot of goings on over the past couple of months that neither myself, or my readers would have known anything about if it were'nt for people like Steve Copollo and Elton on this site doing a bit of digging and researching. That info should have been made public knowledge to everyone - not just my readers, as it happened or even better, way before it happened!

 

The AT have not done themselves any favours. And, despite my continued offer of support, things have remained the same for over 12 months.

 

I don't want to find out from a press release from the EA that I can't take eels up to 6-miles out after the event. I want to be told by the AT that the EA is pushing for this motion to go ahead two months beforehand!

They, the AT, have a moral duty to let the media know what's going on - not just 'get on with it behind closed doors' - I can't see any 'Angler' in their right mind wanting to fund such activity!

[Steve Coppolo]

Steve, some of the things you write are good, not great, but good and show many hours of painstaking researce. You can be a reliable form of information. However, some other things you write like this post is total and utter nonsense.

 

Reg, I think you'll find there is a lot more nonsense in the stuff you've been plastering all over this and the AT forums. Where on earth do you get your information from?

 

When ever someone disagrees with you, you come back with You haven't got a clue, go away and researce some more, you have been fed Bull**** and you have swallowed most of it! Come back when you know something. Evidence is right here in your post and spread all over the AT forum. You never come up with a possible solution to a problem, you push away criticisum with contempt and lies to hide your lack of answers.

 

Yes, that's right, Reg. You expect to suddenly wake up, after years and years of doing bugger all, and get all holier than thou - preaching rubbish to people who DO know what they are talking about. I've pointed you in the right direction, so you can find out a bit more about the subjects you preach about, but you haven't taken any notice. You prefer to keep spouting bull**** and rubbish instead. Why should I remain patient with you, Reg? Lack of answers? I've got all the answers, because I was there when it was all going on. Where were you, Reg Phillips? Sitting on your backside with your thumb up your ar5e and your mind in neutral, no doubt.

 

Oh, and I don't tell lies. I'd look a little bit closer to home if you are looking for some.

 

So you think changing things from within never works, vulgar criticism NEVER works Steve. In your opinion, Wayne is totally wasting his time then, I hope Wayne doesn't think that. If changing things from within doesn't work, why waste your breath on the AT forum, to attack from within thats why Steve. You accuse people of being too arrogant to accept they are wrong, are you talking about yourself Steve. Why are all these people and organizations wrong and you are right. Could it be that the majority of anglers want representation, a voice, a better sport.

 

So far, Wayne has been wasting his time. As you said earlier, he has a hell of a lot to offer sea angling representation. Sadly, his views and ideals don't fit in with the old party line, so they will never see the light of day. You see, that's how it works, Reg. If you had ever been involved, you'd know that by now. Jumping in at the 11th hour, convinced that you have all the the ansers, doesn't give you a very accurate picture, I'm afraid.

 

You know why I joined the AT. They started a forum and I used it. However, I was spending far too much time going over the same things, to people like you who won't accept the truth. To be honest, the Angling Trust forum is a bit like a daisy chain, Reg.

 

Like I've said so many times, and you've ignored so many times, a voice is only a good thing if it is saying the right thing. If it is saying the wrong thing, it becomes dangerous and damaging.

 

The anglers on this forum respect you, as I once did, I truly hope their respect is not wasted. So I am going to correct you on some things if I may Steve.

 

I don't know if anyone respects me, or not. But I do know that respect is something that is earnt, not demanded. Perhaps you should apply that little bit of truth to the Angling Trust?

 

You mean well, Reg, but you won't correct me on anything I say. You simply don't have the knowledge; and that isn't arrogance, it's the truth. And as you've insisted on 'putting me straight', I'll prove it, too.

 

The AT does not support the RSA Strategy, Bags Limits, Sea Rod Licence, if you look at the AT Strategy you will see the truth. Coming back with, forget the AT Strategy, Manifesto, its just words, is a weak response Steve and one that you cannot back-up. Where is your strategy Steve, how are you going to get the members of this forum, out this mess we are in. Blame the AT for everything and do nothing!

 

Who says the Angling Trust doesn't support these things? There are one or two people on the Angling Trust marine conservation group, (which was supposed to have been disbanded, don't forget), who have been pushing to get the RSA strategy signed off. Hardly what you would expect from an organisation that doesn't support it. Bag limits and sea angling licences feature strongly in the RSA strategy. You have read it, haven't you? Did you understand it? Just in case you didn't, a member of the Angling Trust marine committee wrote a letter to the shadow fisheries minister promoting a sea angling licence. I believe that you've seen it, as it was posted on the Angling Trust forum. Again, hardly what you'd expect from an organisation that doesn't support one.

 

It's alright Mike Heylin saying that isn't Angling Trust policy but, as you know, actions speak louder than words. So, like I said, the Angling Trust manifesto, or strategy, or whatever you want to call it, is just a load of meaningless words.

 

The only time you came up with an answer to solve a problem was the alternative to the CFP. What was your policy, ban the commercial quota and give power of management to the commercial fleets. I cannot believe any angler will agree with that Steve.

 

Not sure what answer to what problem you mean, Reg. Why didn't you write the whole article? I wouldn't have minded. The two sentances you've taken don't do it justice. But, never mind. Let's look at what this 'problem', actually is. First of all, anyone who thinks that commercial fishing is going to be stopped to pander to the wishes of a few misguided RSA 'reps', is stupid. Just the same as anyone who thinks that the government, Defra, Cefas, etc, etc, will ever impose severe restrictions on commercial fishing, that may or may not deliver any benefits to sea angling. And that is regardless of who is calling for them, how unified, or how big their 'voice' is. If anyone is telling you otherwise, they are living in cloud cuckoo land.

 

However, discarding is a problem that both recreational and commercial fishermen agree should be addressed. How do you, or the Angling Trust, propose that should be done? To be honest, the thought of the Angling Trust having any influence over such a things is laughable, but if they had a say, how would they tackle the problem? How would you tackle it? Would quotas feature in your plans at all? In the one area where commercial and recreational fishermen could possibly work together to address a common problem, where would you begin? What would you and the Angling Trust replace the quota system with? Or haven't any of you thought of that?

 

There has to be a time when honesty and reality is the only way forward. There may well be a time when a sea rod licence is needed, as much as every sea angler hates the idea, someone has to police our seas if we are to improve our fish stocks. There may even be a time when we have to suffer bags limits, catch and release policies, who really knows, if we wait much longer and do nothing this might happen sooner rather than later. We already know this deep down, but we cannot bring ourselves to say it. Our unified aim, and when I mean unified aim, I refer to real dedicated sea anglers, is to make absolutely sure that we have got something to protect first. That can only be achieved with a governing body, our Angling Trust.

 

Reg, the things you mention are a real possibility because of, not despite, RSA representation! You keep saaying how we have to unite and fight against them, and I agree. The trouble is, the Angling Trust aren't the people to do it. The AT harbours champions of the very threats that you speak of. I refer you again to the RSA strategy. But going back further than that, I can remember RSA 'reps' actively promoting a sea angling licence, and bag limits, and MPA's, and even total catch and release. And you talk about honesty? I've heard it with my own ears. I've seen the words come directly out of their mouths. Where was Reg Phillips when they were saying those things?

 

You sound like you've almost accepted these pointless restrictions and management measures. Is that what talking to the Angling Trust does for you?

 

While we're about it, what do you suppose the Angling Trust are thinking by appointing a marine environmental campaigns manager? What on earth is all that about? What do you think that might do for sea angling? Have you read the job descirption? What are the implications? Any alarm bells ringing? There should be.

 

Like it or not Steve, our Government will only talk to the Angling Trust, so providing weak information that is detremental to the AT, to these guys, makes them feel that maybe they should not join, it is like asking them to throw away their sport. You should be telling these guys to join and protest against everything that is wrong within the AT, some members of the NFSA. Maybe then the board will listen and change things FROM WITHIN.

 

Please, Reg, spare me the romantic claptrap. Do you really think that by not joining the Angling Trust, anglers are throwing away their sport? Give me strength! I tend to believe, based on events over the last year, that the opposite is true. The Angling Trust know what needs to be done, they just won't, or can't, do it. What you've got, with the Angling Trust, is what you've always had - and you're always going to have. It isn't going to change, from within or otherwise, regardless of of any protests by sea anglers. Again, you come in at the 11th hour and assume that none of this has been done. It has, Reg. To what effect, though? No effect at all, that's what.

 

You say the fishing is great, some people are having the best fishing in years, this is another one of your quick responses when you have no way of refuting the facts. There may well be one or two areas that have had a better year than last year, but none are having better years than ten years ago Steve, NONE. We are losing our sport and we have to do something about it now.

 

I disagree. The fishing in some areas has been better than it has been for the lsat 20 and 30 years. That is fact. And it has nothing to do with anything the Angling Trust has done, either. What these commercial fishermen that you moan about catching if there are no fish? You can't have it all ways, Reg. We aren't losing our sport at all. But we will if some of these proposed restrictions become reality.

 

Sea anglers need someone to fight off these proposed restrictions and management measures. At the moment, we haven't got anyone to do it for us, so we are having to try to do it ourselves.

 

How many letters have you written, Reg? How many MP's have you spoken to? How many consultations have you responded to? How many magazines and newspapers have you written to? How many meetings with fisheries managers and scientist have you attended where you've argued against these proposals? Or do you think that writing a cheque out to the Angling Trust is enough of an effort? Leave it all up to someone else, regardless of what sort of job they do? Jesus Christ, you haven't even bothered to find out what is really going on within the Angling Trust and here you are preaching to anyone who will listen what we should be doing!

 

Am I wrong again Steve, are all the experts wrong Steve, are there plenty of fish in the see. Are you too arrogant to admit that you are wrong Steve. Where are the 30lb Cods Steve, where are the 15lb Bass Steve, Where are the 4lb Sole Steve, the 30lb Turbots, the 30lb Blonde Rays, 15lb Spurdogs, 6lb Bream. They are scattered in ones and twos across the country, we are losing the fight and you want us to do nothing! Before you come back and say they are localised due to their habitat, Rubbish......... they are not even localised Steve and nor are the main populations because they don't have a chance to spawn.

 

Yes, you are wrong, Reg. What experts are you talking about? What are they saying, then?

 

All ther people I consider to be experts are saying there are plenty of fish in the sea. There are a few localised problems with some stocks, but in general, things are pretty good.

 

Since when were 30lb cod common? I've been sea fishing since the 70's I can't ever remember them throwing themselves up the beaches. I know where to go if I want to give myself the best chance of catching one, they are out there. But, as always, it's far from a certainty. It never was. Same as 15lb bass. How common were they? Even in the heydays, how many anglers caught a 15lb bass? They are a few around that size caught every year, despite fish stocks being 'depleted'. They are far from common, though. But they never were. We used to see numbers of Spurdogs aroung here, then they disappeared, then the year before last, anglers started to catch them again. What happened there, Reg? They didn't rise from the ashes, that's for sure. My guess is that they went somewhere else and then, for whatever reason, decided to come back. Who knows if they will be there again this year? 4lb sole. How common were they? How many 4lb sole have you caught in your lifetimes fishing?

 

I think you need to have a long hard think about juisy who it is speaking 'rubbish', Reg.

 

I've spent far too much time responding to your post again. I can't keep doing this. I have only bothered this time because I don't believe you are a lost cause. I know you mean well, and you are passionate about your sea fishing. I can respect that. But please don't preach to people about what they should be doing, thinking, supporting, saying, etc, when you only have the few mouthfulls of bull***, that you've been fed, to draw upon. There is a lot of information out there. Years worth, in fact. Far too much for me to go over with you again. Please take up my suggestion and read through some of the posts on this forum over the years. Just search for the relevant topics. And write another cheque out for £20 and join BASS. There is a lot of valuable information on their members forum, too.

[Dave B]

Good timing! Further to my post above - here is an e-mail that just popped through from a BFM reader! Referring to 'eelgate'.

 

Hi Dave,

Having read Steve's Angle in this months BFM, I was appaulled at what I was reading. I rang my local MP and they didn't have a clue what I was talking about. I explained, that this bye-law breached my common rite to take fish from the sea for food.

As the law stands " every man has the common rite to take whatever fish he wants from the sea as long as it is to feed himself and his family. (not that I want to take eels)

The new by-law breaches this rite.

My local MP has asked me to ask if you can e-mail a copy of Steve's article and a copy of the new by-law so he can look into it for me. I will be much obliged if you can help with this. If we can get at least one MP on our side it will help.

his e-mail address is kempf@parliament.com

If you could forward a copy of Steve's article and the original by-law to Fraser Kemp MP and mark it for the attention of Val ( his secratary).

 

Best regrds,

Mike Haley

Edited February 19, 2010 by Dave B

[Steve Coppolo]

We're fast reaching the point of 'Too little too late' Reg, There has been a hell of a lot of goings on over the past couple of months that neither myself, or my readers would have known anything about if it were'nt for people like Steve Copollo and Elton on this site doing a bit of digging and researching. That info should have been made public knowledge to everyone - not just my readers, as it happened or even better, way before it happened!

 

The AT have not done themselves any favours. And, despite my continued offer of support, things have remained the same for over 12 months.

 

I don't want to find out from a press release from the EA that I can't take eels up to 6-miles out after the event. I want to be told by the AT that the EA is pushing for this motion to go ahead two months beforehand!

They, the AT, have a moral duty to let the media know what's going on - not just 'get on with it behind closed doors' - I can't see any 'Angler' in their right mind wanting to fund such activity!

 

 

You've hit the nail on the head, dave. The email is a good illustration of what you are talking about.

 

No one should have to go digging for information as important as that when we are supposed to have a 'governing body' representing the interests of all anglers - regardless of their views.

Edited February 19, 2010 by Steve Coppolo

[Sharkbyte]

Honest to God, I worry for you Reg.

 

Whoever it is feeding you all of this rubbish, go back and get them on here.

 

 

Despite my earlier comments, I simply can't sit on hands any longer and allow some of this nonsense to pass unchallenged.

 

 

 

Take this for example.

 

So anglers in this area can forget about the BASS and TOPE fishing in the Thames for the next 20 years.

 

 

To be clear, I think the Thames dredging operation is disgraceful, especially in the light of some of the species and habitats that, according to the experts, 'need' to be protected from anglers and their activities.

 

However, to claim that the bass and tope fishing will be doomed for the next twenty years is beyond the ridiculous, and quite frankly typical of the armchair experts who spend more time having their prostates examined than out sea fishing.

 

 

Who told you this?

Edited February 19, 2010 by Sharkbyte

[Yido]

Ok, I have just received this from Mike Heylin AT Chairman

 

To view the AT Strategy:

 

http://www.

anglingtrust.net/news.asp?itemid=515&itemTitle=Fighting+for+the+Future+of+Your+Fishing&section=29&sectionTitle=Angling+Trust+Latest+News

 

I have checked it, believe me it does work, honest

 

Or if you go the the AT front page and click on the logo next to the lead story, middle of the page. The Strategy is a .pdf at the foot of the page.

 

The AT response to the Reform of the CFP is not up yet, he will email the link as soon he can.

[Yido]

It's a real shame that they didn't listen to their own advice then. Instead of liaising with the EA after (allegedly) contacting their members over the coarse fish and eels removal legislation, why didn't they just keep quiet until they'd got an organisation that spoke with one voice. If you're going to set up a national organisation then surely a means of communication with the people that you are hoping to represent is the first thing you set up? Wouldn't it also be wise to get a decent membership that could inform the organisation of the views they would like to be represented before proclaiming their "National Governing Body" status and dictating the views that the AT committees held was that of the average angler?

 

As a non-member I sent a lot of e-mails to Mark Lloyd asking what the AT stance was on a variety of issues. He wasn't too forthcoming regarding replies!

 

As a non-specialist river angler and a sea angler as well. I have waited to see what the AT can do for me. Unfortunately the only things that they have been active in so far are to support restrictive legislation. Ok, not everybody eats coarse fish and those that do are usually tarred with an Eastern European "eat every fish you catch" brush but, that is not the AT sticking up for all anglers.

 

The advice by the AT to support the MCS by naming areas to be listed as conservation areas does not fill me with joy either. A long time ago on this forum I was having a "lively" debate with some experienced sea anglers and I suggested (before the AT) that anglers talking with the MCS to find common ground would be a good idea. Talking being the operative word, not just putting a link up to a site that mentions potential restrictions on RSAs!

 

The AT seem to have jumped on several bandwagons at once. The problem is, nobody bothered to ask in which direction they were going.

 

I don't necessarily agree with all of your views (as regards the AT forum) but I do admire you for coming on to the AN forum to say your bit. It's a shame that Mark Lloyd and more of the "management" don't seem too interested in facing the flak from we mere mortal non-members.

 

I like to shop around for a bargain and, if I'm going to spend my money on something I like to see that I get value for money. If I want a new reel for instance I will trawl the internet and ask questions on fora as to suitability, reliability etc. before I hand over my cash. In my opinion so far, the AT reel is cheap, badly finished and likely to let you down when you've got a big one on!............No thanks, not yet but, in the meantime take it off the market, fix the problems and then re-market it.

 

Nick

 

Ok Nick, I will ask if someone from the AT wants to come on hear and say their bit, at least it will save them some money