Why Should You Join The SAA ???

[Guest Leon Roskilly]

Hi Leon,

 

Thanks for your e mail.

 

In the Lure Angler issue 31 we carried an article on the SAA and a free advert enabling people to join.

 

We invited comments from the members as the stance we should take and received none.

For or against.

 

We do not have the finances to join as a society without raising subs.

 

As a committee we have a financial responsiblity to all the members and as such have not joined.

 

We would not discourage anyone from joining as an individual member and if sufficient members wanted the LAS to join the SAA, we would not resist.

 

Yours is the first letter that a member has sent indicating a wish to join.

 

It is a pity you did not reply to my request for views prior to the AGM, which was attended by a total of 10 members with one apology.

 

If you had attended, perhaps you could have raised the subject.

 

This matter of the SAA and our not joining is not cast in stone. You are an active member of the SAA and attend their quarterly meetings.

 

If you feel there is something for us, why not contact us directly.

 

We have made great efforts to be available to all LAS members, with phone no's and e mail addresses published in each mag.

 

If you wish to paste this on to anglers net, please feel free.

 

Cheers

Neil

[Guest davidP]

Originally posted by Steve Burke:

Various bodies are affiliated to the NAA representing for instance coarse, sea and game anglers.  Within the specimen hunting world for example we have the SAA.  Match/pleasure anglers, who sometimes have different views to specimen hunters, are represented by the NFA.

 

 

The NFA actually represent the Clubs that affiliate to them - they have very few individual members. Have you ever belonged to a club where the majority were match anglers? The vast majority of the members that make up those affiliated clubs are not match anglers - they have anglers of every persuasion with match anglers usually being only a relatively small percentage. In fact I'd say that in many clubs the number of anglers claiming to be Specialists would probably be similar to the number claiming to be matchmen, and often higher.

 

In my experience however (and I emphasise that this is from my personal experience) that small percentage of matchmen often makes up a large percentage of those members actually prepared to do any work. Don't get me wrong, the specimen guys do their bit, but the average specialist tends to be far more interested in local stuff compared to the match angler. I think perhaps they're more focussed on just one or two venues whereas the match anglers cover a wider area and hence seem to be more concerned about the big picture. Perhaps this is because by its very definition the specimen hunter is more of a loner and an individual than the match angler. Yes, they all have their opinions, but the matchman is more likely to be vocal about it.

The upshot of this is of course is that it's often the match anglers who attend meetings and therefore set the agenda for the club. And then every year when delegates are appointed to attend the NFA Conference the matchmen are the ones that volunteer to go because they want a say in whatever changes are being proposed to the Nationals. I've thought for a long time that there should be 2 separate conferences - one for general NFA business and one for match-related stuff. That way those that actually care about the politics can attend and make their points whilst those only interested in whether they can use bloodworm can do the same at their own meeting. When I was a delegate I always used to think that too many of the latter were present and that they weren't interested in 75% of what was discussed, and it showed!

 

The NFA has another problem - their Press image. Perhaps their perceived match bias is also partly due to the press they get. It is incumbent on them as anglings' governing body to organise the National Championships and organise match-fishing events at International level. The problem is however that that is all that people see of them in the Press and it rubs off. The difficulty is that articles about them attending meetings with Government, sports bodies, consultative meetings, responding to proposals etc just don't make exciting reading. Anglers Mail can't make up 'witty' headlines about the fact that the NFA responded to a Government Green paper so they don?t bother. It's not exciting, it's not controversial so they don't want to know, and to be honest you can't really blame them. It must also be said however that the NFA do not appear to have made any particularly strenuous effort to overcome this image either, so to a certain extent they've only themselves to blame!

 

There are of course other issues such as the fact that the structure of the NFA does not lend itself to attracting Specialist anglers or syndicates, but I think they're secondary to their image in determining who joins.

 

Please note that through all this I am basing my remarks on my experiences and my view of an 'average'. Anglers Net is a different matter - there are far more activists on here that you would ever find in most clubs and the clientele in most cases could not be regarded as average. Perhaps that's one of the reasons why I like coming here - the intelligence rises above the dumbing down that is going on elsewhere in life

 

 

[This message has been edited by davidP (edited 17 November 2001).]

[Guest Alan Roe]

Thank you gentlemen can we step aside and allow ourselves to get away from personality issues and back on to the salient points.

 

This has been an interesting thread with some very valid pionts being made on all sides.

 

One or two things I would like to flag up that have come out of the debate. Firstly I feel that there is a great need to publicise the pyramid stucture of angling bodies so that many more people can see how they can best fit in with what to many seems a veritable alphabet soup of organisations.

Possibly if more people could be allowed to understand how the structures work they may be more inclined to join in.

 

I see Dave Bird has come in for some flack over his views on the way the ACA is going and the particular concerns about Bob James being anglings chairman in the CA.

It has to be said that he is not alone in his concerns I have had many people voice the same concerns to me over the last year or so.

Many anglers currently regard the CA with some alarm and suspicion, whether they are right or wrong in this set of concerns will remain to be seen. However I feel that these do need to be aired.

Like many anglers I am a member of the ACA and will remain so as I wholly support the work that has been done both in the legal aspects and also in the potential for good PR for angling. That having been said I feel that a great deal more could be achieved particularly on the PR front and also on the recruitment front. I have voiced these concerns to Jane James when we have met at events but as yet there doesn't seem to have been much change as yet.

I attended the last SAA meeting and I fully intend to give up a days leave to attend the forthcoming one in November and to try to help out as and where I can I would very much like to see many of your faces at this meeting as so many of you are articulate and capable and could prove to be a very real and valuable asset in developing the future of angling, so that we have something decent in the way of a legacy to pass on to our children.

 

[This message has been edited by Alan Roe (edited 17 November 2001).]

[Guest trent.barbeler]

Hi David,

 

Cracking post.

 

I totally agree. Its high time that the NFA looked towards the 21st Century and promoted themselves more effectively.

 

The NFA has a lot to offer and there are vast armies of ordinary anglers out there.

 

Regards,

 

Lee

[Guest phil hackett]

Originally posted by Peter Waller:

Phil, if you rember, when the SACG was the topic of quite heated debate, some months ago, your attitude was questioned then. Maybe you could take this point as well intended and constructive critiscism.

 

 

Last word from me on this subject Al. Honest!

Pete states that my attitude was question before on a past thread on SACG issue. (Steve Pope’s Angling Unity Thread) As I have no recollection of any such criticisms being made and after checking the thread, I feel that a response is appropriate to the accusation he has made against me.

 

I made 3 post on that thread which is 5 pages long.

The first was in relation to some points he raised and I asked him a series of questions to which he answered NO. p.2

 

The next point was a point of information and a statement of fact, no comments were added to that by me or anybody else p.3

 

The final comments I made were in relation to an individual again pointing out some facts where information had already been given in the thread p.4. Newt makes some comments about it being totally confusing to him and probably other anglers as well. Newt in this thread kind of makes the same points, which unbeknown to the readers of this thread until now. I have spent the last two nights writing a full synopsis of the “alphabet soup,” as newt puts it. That synopsis covers the history, who they are, who they represent, etc. I did that in order to keep a fellow angler, who really couldn’t get involved because of where he lives, informed. I look for no credit for that from anybody. It was something I felt, I personally had to do, so he would in the future have a better understanding of these kind of issue. I think he’s owed that because of his loyalty and posts on this site.

 

In regards to Pete’s accusation the evidence doesn’t support his claim and I would ask him to withdraw it.

 

The final comment I’ll make is, I ask direct no nonsense questions and keep asking them until an answer/explanation is forthcoming. That is my style, for which I make no apologies.

 

END

[Guest Peter Waller]

Phil, there were other threads on the subject. But anyway, what was intended as a constructive critiscism has been taken as a personal insult, which was not intended, so please accept my appologies and yes, comment withdrawn, sorry for any offence, non intended.Peter.

[Guest trent.barbeler]

Hi Phil,

 

END.

 

Is that your final answer.

Do you want to phone a friend? 50-50 or ask the audience?

 

Regards,

 

Lee.

[Guest Alan Pearce]

DavidP, the Nfa are trying, albeit rather slowly, to become more active towards the general membership. The Specialist Anglers Alliance (SAA) is affiliated to the NFA and has been offered and excepted a place on its National Excecutive. Both the NFA and the SAA are members of the National Anglers Alliance (NAA).

[Guest Chris Woodrow]

Another little incentive to join the SAA, 10% off all tackle and bait at Essex Angling.

 

Not that you should need any 'incentive' .

 

JOIN UP NOW !!!!!!!!

 

Chris Woodrow

SAA Essex RO

[Guest Graham E]

Chris, where can I find an uptodate Heirachy of the SAA?

 

Thanks