SAA, NFA, NAA and the rivers close season..?....

[Brian Talbot]

Steve's post speaks for itself and say's it all. Off he goes again into the wilderness.

The membership is never offered a vote on anything i think you'll find. It is a one man band singing it's own song.

[dorsal fin]

I don't think by the sounds of it the B.S. committee would want a vote on joining the SAA. Probably because if the members heard what the SAA were about and what they stood for, they would probably be faced with a "yes" vote to join.

 

Some will drivle on about" ooh but what about the Grayling society, there not members either". To that i will respond by adding that i doubt very much if many members of the Grayling Society contribute to this board or any other web/ angling site. That is not a jibe at them just probabilty for they may be a large group but come on, get real, grayling are mainly a species that very few fish for regularly. Even if they do it will never be classed alongside carp,barbel and pike.

If the SAA,EA,RSSG or any other group can help preserve the closed season on rivers then good luck to them all.

[Andy Nellist]

I was just reading something in the Am of a couple of weeks ago which was talking about the fuss that greated the abolition of size limits by the LAA. Seems that in the last thirty years we have not learnt to deal with contentious issues in a more civilised fashion.

 

For my part I don't believe that the abolition of the close season on rivers will have the impact that is claimed. however i am happy to accepot that if the majority are in favour of retaining it then so be it.

 

It seems to me that all of the angling organisations are getting bogged down in politics. Instead of doing anything you are all too busy arguing about how to do it.

 

What you guys should be doing is identifying the areas of common ground and then cooperating with each other. Where you do not agree with each other you should agree to disagree.

 

As I stated in an earlier post I for one will not become a member of any of your organisations (and I am sure there are many others who feel the same) until you become a great deal more pragmatic in your approach to working for the benefit of angling in general.

 

I look forward to the day when I will feel that I should and can join some of the organisations mentioned because they will be fighting in a positive manner for the future of angling.

[Brian Talbot]

Andy, there are too many anglers on the outside who do nothing and put nothing back into angling, like yourself. At least these groups especially SAA try and get some things done for the better. Join and contribute something positive.

 

[ 17 April 2002, 12:14 AM: Message edited by: Brian Talbot ]

[Peter Waller]

Brian Talbot:

Steve's post speaks for itself and say's it all. Off he goes again into the wilderness.

The membership is never offered a vote on anything i think you'll find. It is a one man band singing it's own song.

So what? If its members don't like the BS then they have a perfect right to vote with their feet. And good luck to them if they do. But come on, one man band or what, its a darn effective body led by a very effective Dictator!

 

So what's new? Numerous Political Animals have manouvered themselves, and their created clubs, into positions of power, claiming they have been voted into power. Rubbish! They are there because no one else wanted the job! Hardly democratic but its the best that we have. Atleast, one way or another, some folk are prepared to put in the hours.

 

The BS is an effective body, you may not like its lack of democracy, but it has a clear mandate in that it is allowed to continue, pretty well unchallenged, probably because it is 'right' when it comes to angling matters.

 

It is just a pity that some folk either abuse their created positions, or totally misjudge, or ignore the clear messages from the riverbank, either way us anglers reap the harvest of their errors.

 

But what on earth has this all got to do with the subject of the thread?

[Brian Talbot]

Originally posted by Steve Pope:

quote:

---

I've said it before and I'll say it again here, too many people playing the political game are wearing too many hats. This believe it or not goes to the root of almost all the issues that cause such great division. The Barbel Society is still biding its time and with good reason.

---

Peter. Steve is very political animal and 99% of the B.S members are not. Steve is the one with too many hats and playing the political games at the expense of it's members who do not agree with him. Steve is also trying to speak for every barbel angler in the country where the majority are not B.S. members, and some have different opinions.

The views of Steve Pope are being falsely interpreted by others in higher places that he represents every barbel angler nationwide. It is not the case!

 

[ 17 April 2002, 01:10 AM: Message edited by: Brian Talbot ]

[Alan Roe]

Gentlemen perhaps it is time to now agree to disagree on some aspects of angling politics and also accept that the way each organisation is run is perhaps the affair of the members of that body and if they don't like it they can set up their own group...assuming that they can get the support of others of like mind.

 

Having had time to read the article in AT that sparked off the original thread I fel that it is time our sights were turned on that once vital angling organ and question the whys and wherefores that lead to the publishing of the column inches that were expended on the topic.

 

Victor.....whoops! Peter has provided an oportunity to do so with an excellent thread on this very subject.....

[phil hackett]

What this thread & MOU thread has shown, is that there ARE imperfections in most if not all-angling organisations. Let’s hope we're all a little bit wiser from these robust exchanges of views!

Oh go on then Pete! I’ll agree to disagree until the next time, and there will undoubtedly be a next time I’m sure!

[chesters1]

i`m thinking of setting up a "fishing club at number 30 " in retaliation to the "fishing club at number 16" and "fishing club at number 10" ,just joking the only way to get angling unity (on paper) will be when theres an elected "council " all the societies would subscribe to the "council" (maybe clubs could subscribe) the "council" once elected would be the face of angling (a media person ,a few fishing greats etc) they speak on behalf of the general fisherfolk (with consultation to the societies ) leave these people to get on with the media work and let the societies childishly squabble amoungst them selves ,i`m sure that once the societies realise the "top dog" job i.e "the council" has been formed for theirs and everybody elses benefit hopefully a democratic form of representaion can be achieved .

i think i could be living in cloud cookoo land as nothing like this will happen as the we want this attitude will continue untill the day comes and we WAKE up to find the determind effort of "one voice" groups? like peta have already had fishing banned behind our backs (we were too busy squabbling to notice. :mad:

[Andy Nellist]

Brian you said

 

"Andy, there are too many anglers on the outside who do nothing and put nothing back into angling, like yourself. At least these groups especially SAA try and get some things done for the better. Join and contribute something positive."

 

You assume incorrectly that just because I am not a member of any organisation that I do nothing. In fact I simply chose to do my bit outside the the umbrella of an organisation.