Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Peter Waller

A case against the CA / NAA 'agreement'.

Recommended Posts

Having read all post to this point - twice - having printed them off I can only say your fishing politic is as convoluted as the sport seems itself.

I often "speak" on behalf of strangers at official gatherings. For example, if I express an opinion at an official fish and game governmental fourm in opposition to PETA there is no time to poll the masses.

From my perspective a single letter to me, the spokesman, is a vote of a 1000. And so it goes. In us politic letters do wonders in expressing your opinion to rulemakers.

While the expression in this post was just hammered out without much more than a rambling you get my point.

Write letters.

Phone

Phone: LOL can you tell this post is heavily influenced by a couple "calmer downers". Mostly Kentucky Burbon.

 

[ 01 April 2002, 05:38 AM: Message edited by: phonebush ]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I joined the SAA last year after having been convinced by 'waterman' and others that it was the right thing to do. It felt right for me, so I joined!

 

I have not been given the opportunity to voice my concerns on this matter to the SAA, but I take it, its representatives have mandated their delegates to vote for the NAA to sign this 'memorandum of understnding' on our behalf?

 

On such an important issue as this, I would have expected the membership to be contacted for their views?

 

Personally, I feel the NAA should have taken on the CA publicly, for the general public would then be made more aware that they do NOT represent angling - the NAA does!

 

It is clear that government (whoever is in power) WILL bow eventually to public pressure! Therefore it is the general public we need to convince.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone who posts on this type of thread makes a valid point.Simply put it is an issue that divides rather than unites. Some one should have realised that.

 

The overriding problem as I see it as that Anglings public relations and Communications set up is quite frankly abysmal.

 

I'm not going to knock anyone here and would say that angling politics is a thankless task HOWEVER that is no excuse.

 

So, my message is simple, sort it out, get the right people in to put across the right message, not only to the powers that be and the general public, but to ALL anglers. Our basic PR is non existant.

 

Surely it can't be beyond the wit and imagination on those who seek and hold some sort of authority.

 

Until we actually get the right people in the right positions with a mandate approved by the majority , this constant disagreement over many of the perceived major issues will continue.

 

So, before you come back at me, this is an observation, not a dig at any one in particular, more the structure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
STEVE POPE:

So, my message is simple, sort it out, get the right people in to put across the right message, not only to the powers that be and the general public, but to ALL anglers. Our basic PR is non existant.

Steve forgive me, but that sounds rather like a sketch I once watched:

 

'Children, today we will show you how to cure all mankind's diseases.

 

So, how do you cure all mankind's diseases?

 

Well you have to work very hard at school and get into university, then study very hard and become a brilliant doctor, then you go out and discover a cure for all the world's diseases.

 

Tomorrow we will tell you how to eliminate poverty and bring about world peace.' :)

 

Surely it can't be beyond the wit and imagination on those who seek and hold some sort of authority.

 

Steve, all we have is those (too few) anglers who go beyond expressing their opinions and are prepared to step forward to do the job as best they can; fitting in the meetings, reading reams and reams of documents and emails, trying to take account of everyone's opposing views, and giving up time from family, business and fishing, all largely paid for out of their own pockets.

 

Then suffering the brickbats when they inevitably fail to please everyone.

 

Anyone else who wants to make sure that their views are expressed properly, and who are prepared to share the load - well the door's open and there's a hearty welcome on the mat :)

 

Tight Lines - leon


RNLI Shoreline Member

Member of the Angling Trust

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear All,

 

Given the fact that Leon and others state that they have not read the "Memorandum of Understanding" between the NAA and the CAA, clearly indicates that they, as SAA members were not consulted on this document or the agreement. Or so it appears. Did the "Memorandum of Understanding" appear on any of the SAA meetings agenda's or within those meetings minutes for example?

 

I do find it strange that people seem to be defending something that they admit to NOT having read themselves. Before I could comment on something as important as this "Memorandum of Understanding" between the NAA and CAA, I would have to read its contents for myself. Indeed, I have asked Mike Heylin for a copy only last evening.

 

Leon mentioned Charles Jardine as being the spokesman for CAA.

 

I recall in my last time of membership within the SACG, Charles Jardine appearing on a radio 5 programe where the sharp interviewer managed to brow-beat Charles into admitting that fish felt pain! Or am I mistaken?

 

Leon and myself, indeed Steve Pope, know only to well that those working for angling are to few on the ground. Angling desparately needs more people coming into organisations to help out an already over-stretched tiny minority working against the tide for angling. And this lack of help, ultimately means that certain organisations become undermanned which results in their work being prioritised. People that work for angling mostly do it for free, in their own time which ultimately means much of their personal family and recreational time is lost to working for angling. Trust me here, with myself working late into the early hours night after night, and being up early to run my own business, I know what this effort entails. From my point of view, it seves no purpose continuing to criticise publicly those already working for angling unless one is prepared to get in there to bring about change either to those representing anglers or to help out from within.

 

Is this another excuse from myself on behalf of organisations such as the SAA for example? No it is not. It is merely a statement of fact. Steve Pope recently told me that running an angling organisation is worse than running a business. Well, Steve is spot on and a lot of us do both!

 

Now I speak the truth and will never lead anyone up the garden path. Clearly, angling is NOT happy about this "Memorandum of Understanding" between the NAA and the CAA. But clearly, some anglers ARE happy about joining forces with the CAA. What ever ones personal views are, anglers are free to form their own opinions and act, if they choose to do so, in any way they see fit.

 

Anglers also have the right to voice their opinions if they DONT belong to anything. One does not have to become pidgeon holed within a organisation to still hold an opinion. Freedom of speech does not come with the condition to be a paid up member of anything. It comes with being born into a democracy.

 

Now I dont believe that the SAA or indeed the NAA are perfect. I seriously doubt that anyone within these organisations do either. But unless I try and help out or try to alter what I see as short comings, I cannot be reasonably seen by angling generally to be defending my personal criticism's. That is why I have re-joined the SAA to help out and speak out at anything I either dont agree with or dont like. And trust me people, I can make a difference. But only if I'm in there, doing something.

 

Frankly, I dont like the idea of having to form an "understanding" with anyone who seeks to speak for those who can speak perfectly well for themselves. And in the case of the CAA, the angling branch of CA, I would ask this;

 

Would it have not been better for the CAA to be part of the NAA in the first place? At least that way the CAA would have been under the NAA umbrella and effectively outside of their own present umbrella the CA on angling related matters. I know that this probably would have not sat well with some at the time, but it might have prevented the present situation from occurring.

 

I do know one thing for certain though. As Steve Pope says, angling governing bodies PR within angling itself leaves a lot to be desired. And probably contributes to anglers not wanting to join something. The plain fact is that angling governing bodies have to sell the idea of anglers joining them a lot better than they do at present. And to do that, angling governing bodies need more people coming in with new and bright idea's to put forward to make the workload of those who are already there a lot lighter. The plain fact is, they just cant do everything because there are simply to few of them. They need more help and they need some new idea's being tossed into the pot.

 

The great house of British angling is being built brick by brick. Each person coming in to help out and contribute means its another brick laid towards the roof that will shelter us all. But we must work together. All of us in any way that we can.

 

The RSSG has arrived to work for our river systems and the anglers who fish in them. I passionately believe that the RSSG will do good things and make a significant difference. But this does not mean that the RSSG will become an island with no bridge linking itelf to the outside world of angling. We are all stake holders in fishing. Each and everyone of us. The RSSG is here not only for our own members who fish within river systems, it is here to help out where it can.

 

As an individual and secretary of the RSSG, I am passionate about river fishing and totally committed to the RSSG cause.

 

As an individual and passionate angler, I have re-joined the SAA because I feel it is the right thing to do.

 

I do this not merely to put my money where my mouth is. But to put my mouth where the money goes too. Inside, working to change what I dont like and working to support and help what I do.

 

At the end of the day, thats the bottom line.

 

History throughout the ages defines change and dictates direction. If enough want change and new directions for the greater good, you have got to become involved and speak out. Help out and do your bit for angling. I also passionately believe that actual act of pure angling should ride side by side with issues of angling environmental issues and politics. The actual act of going fishing and everything it entails should be promoted as vigerously as possible within angling governing bodies so as to fully promote ALL aspects of angling. This pure angling side would also go some way in encouraging more people to become involved.

 

We can change what we feel isn't right and we can preserve and support what we feel is. Effectively and properly by being inside. Not out.

 

Regards,

 

Lee Fletcher RSSG secretary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lee,

 

I take it you would offer the same 'change from the inside' argument to persuade the UK to further european integration then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Geoff,

 

How are you?

 

Geoffs Quote;

"

I take it you would offer the same 'change from the inside' argument to persuade the UK to further european integration then"?

 

Could you please expand your question Geoff as I dont understand what it is you are asking in relation to angling. Or is this your sense of humour Geoff. Take your time in expanding Geoff because I may be some time answering. The wife is dragging me off into the deep dark world of the "garden centre".

 

Regards,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The main text of the press release announcing the M.O.U. between the NAA and CA (not CAA, Steve, that is a somewhat different animal!) can be found on the press release section of Anglers' Net.

 

In the accompanying notes to editors, it is stated that:-

 

The NAA mission is to protect and promote the fish and fisheries of the UK and, in support of this, to protect the rights and interests of those who fish by rod and line.

 

The CA mission is to defend and promote rurral livelihoods and liberty, and to campaign for a sustainable future for rural people, in a tolerant and diverse country.


Bruno

www.bruno-broughton.co.uk

'He who laughs, lasts'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With respect Bruno,

The Press release is just that and nothing else.

What I would like to see is the form of words

used in the actual memorandum....I would have

thought that this information would be freely

available ....that fact that it is not is strange

and somewhat worrying...

Be Lucky!...miasma..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
miasma:

With respect Bruno,

The Press release is just that and nothing else.

What I would like to see is the form of words

used in the actual memorandum....I would have

thought that this information would be freely

available ....that fact that it is not is strange

and somewhat worrying.

The respect is returned, but...

 

The MOU says exactly what is stated on the press release. That is:

 

1. The NAA is the principal organisation

representing and promoting angling and

the interests of anglers.

 

2. The CA is the principal organisation

defending all country sports in the

context of rural livelihood and liberty.

 

Tony Bird (NAA Chairman) will join the board

of the CA and Richard Burge (CA Chief

Executive) will attend meetings of the NAA.

 

There is no hidden agenda or small print. It is a memo of understanding, not a contract, agreement, take over or anything else.


Bruno

www.bruno-broughton.co.uk

'He who laughs, lasts'

Share this post


Link to post
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
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...