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

[STEVE POPE]

Had an interesting, perhaps I should say disturbing discussion with Angling Times today regarding a story for next week.

 

Bearing in mind all the hooha regarding the CA, I'll put this one to you.

 

If the NFA start to push for the abolition of the rivers close season how are things likely to develop within the corridors of power? Men like John Williams will continue to exert pressure and men like Ken Ball might just listen.

 

Once again people will be put to the test and I for one would not want to see this issue given up in the name of unity.

 

I'ver 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.

[chesters1]

probably a chance for the e.a to put a 25% increase on the rod license ,after all you pay £21 a YEAR although if you fish rivers you can fish for only 8 months

[Leon Roskilly]

An interesting one Steve.

 

'Unity' can only be sacrificed once.

 

The SAA can only commit political suicide just once.

 

The number of issues out there 'worth' sacrificing unity for, or losing the SAA as an influential body for are many.

 

Remember once it's gone, it's gone - at least for many decades.

 

So how about a list of all those issues where we should pull the plug, all go home and do a bit of fishing, instead of (more effectivly)working for the benefit of angling?

 

hmmmm! lets see some of the candidates.

 

- All fish hooked must be killed

- Fishing allowed with more than four rods

- Close season abolished on all waters

- Livebaiting banned

- All Zander (or any restricted fish) caught must be killed

- Examinations to be passed before a licence can be purchased

 

Oh! I'm too tired for this!!

 

What would be on your list folks?

 

And once Unity has been lost, because of a single issue, and government etc will no longer talk / take notice of all the various individual angling interest groups, some with opposing agendas, who will work to try to rebuild unity and give us an effective voice again.

 

Tight Lines - leon

[chesters1]

perhapps we should get a media "face " to speak for us perhaps that "tiswas" bloke or some other "actor chappie" that fishes maybe that crooner what was in the who etc.

[pinky]

if the governing bodies represent the anglers then on such a major thing it should be put to a vote.each bodie would have a yes or no and at a joint meeting the yes and no`s are counted and the majority wins.

simple or too simple,ooh yeah politics where doomed!

[dorsal fin]

Steve it looks like all you ever do is bide the time instead of contributing to the overall matter in hand. Fishing as a whole is under threat from one angle or another, not just the close season on rivers.

On checking out the SAA code of conduct etc i find it difficult to believe that many anglers can disagree with their aims. We will all never agree about everything but will make little progress by biding our bloody time so we can in the future turn around and say "we told you so"

[Leon Roskilly]

euan pink:

if the governing bodies represent the anglers then on such a major thing it should be put to a vote.each bodie would have a yes or no and at a joint meeting the yes and no`s are counted and the majority wins.

simple or too simple,ooh yeah politics where doomed!

The NFA has hundreds of thousands of members.

 

The SAA has around 10,000.

 

If each body gets one vote, isn't that a bit unfair on the NFA membership.

 

If each organisation casts a block vote, then the Specialist Anglers lose all the time.

 

Voting is an intrinsically unjust system, leading to the domination of minorities, by simple majorities, with no regard to the justice or ethics of the subject of the vote.

 

A system whereby each party is committed to work towards a consensus usually produces a much better result for everyone.

 

It has to be a win/win situation for the parties to agree, or at least to agree a compromise where what is given up is balanced by the general good, and is recognised as such by the parties reaching the compromise.

 

When it becomes necessary to move to a vote, it is an admission of failure of one side or the other, to come up with a convincing solution acceptable to all.

 

One side wins, the other loses. Who is right is immaterial.

 

That isn't unity, its a recipe for bitterness, revenge, shady deals ('you vote for me and I'll vote for you and we'll crush them) and injustice.

 

Tight Lines - leon

[trent.barbeler]

Dear All,

 

The rivers close season, according to the EA in their response to MAFF, stated that it should stay until scientific evidence is provided that proves there will be no threat to wild fish stocks by removing it.

 

Now what that means, or should mean, is that the EA will continue to recommend that the rivers close season stays in place until "someone", not the EA, comes up with scientific evidence to prove otherwise.

 

If say the NFA,the NAA or indeed the CA wanted to scrap the rivers close season, they would first have to come up with scientific evidence to back up their case. The gathering of such evidence would be very expensive arising from studies carried out over a number of years that would certainly run into hundereds of thousands of pounds. None of the above organisations have that kind of money available to spend on such research. And in any case, how do you gather such evidence anyway.

 

I would think, or hope, that the SAA would back the retention of the rivers close season seeing as part of its fore-runners, the SACG backed the retention of the rivers close season before. I was part of that process back then so know first hand the commitment to retaining the close season on rivers given by the SACG.

 

But, like Steve Pope, I have my concerns about the rivers close season coming under attack again and would like to clarify certain aspects on this now.

 

The SACG "DID" become involved in retaining the rivers close season and thats a fact. So did the Barbel Society and many others at the time much to their credit. Indeed, because of those joint efforts at the time, we all managed to retain the rivers close season against seemingly overwhelming odds.

 

But; In order for the "new" SAA to become involved in another campaign to retain the rivers close season again, there MUST be commited river anglers within the SAA calling for support from the rest of the SAA membership. That's what Chris Turnbull and myself did before in the SACG days and thats what is going to have to happen again if we want a similar continued support from the majority of specialist angling within the membership of SAA.

 

This is a reality and one of the reasons why I re-joined SAA because the reality is, unless you are inside asking for support for major issues to be addressed and supported by others, you just ain't gonna get it. But that aside, the more voices river angling has coming from all sides like those in the Barbel Society for example, the louder river anglers voices become. Unity takes on many shapes and forms. Solidarity on the major issues facing angling is the important aspect to winning battles for angling. And does not necessarily go hand in glove that we all belong to any particular organisation in order to achieve this.

 

I happen to believe that river angling issues should be addressed by anglers who are committed to fishing within river systems. Indeed, this is the underlying reason why the RSSG came into being so that ordinary river anglers voices and concerns could be listened to.

 

Furthermore, the RSSG wasn't in place when the rivers close season came under threat before. But now thankfully, it is. Which means its river fishing members opinions concerning the rivers close season will be voiced.

 

And if anyone out there want's to know what the RSSG position on the rivers close season will be, please ask. Not privately, but here on a public forum where I will be only to pleased to make the RSSG stance perfectly clear for ALL to see.

 

Regards,

 

Lee Fletcher RSSG secretary.

[Peter Waller]

It is unfortunate that one body can, as has happened, look after its own members at the expense of another group. It would seem that the RSSG & BS is going to have a fight on their hands in the form of David & Golieth. If the NFA is intent on pushing for a total lifting of the close season then, like the MOU, it is an issue that will split rather than unite anglers. The present close season system is a fair compromise for all parties & should be supported as such. As I have said elsewhere, I feel betrayed by our angling politicians re the MOU, can I now trust them over the close season?

 

I felt that the close season issue had been settled, apparently not. Still, as far as the NAA is concerned, Trout & Salmon anglers have a close season, they could be our saviour. Perhaps we should push for a total ban on keepnets, but agree to drop that issue if the NFA drop the Close Season issue. Perhaps Angling Times is just trying to stir up some extra sales during the close season.

 

Reckon the keepnet issue is worth exploring.

 

Cheers, Victor Meldrew.

[trent.barbeler]

Dear Leon,

 

"Consensus" agreements are NOT immune to corrupt pre-meeting agreements made in just the same way that a "voting" system can. It all depends on the integrity of those sitting around the table.

 

What voting does do however, is give a meetings proceedings a rubber stamped democratic majority decision that officers and committee members cant adjust or alter afterwards.

 

I thought that Steves thread was about a new or possible threat to the rivers close season and to some extent, given Steves comments, how angling feels certain organisations would react to it.

 

I feel that continued efforts at undertaking PR for the SAA and other governing bodies has been done to death on another thread. Please, lets not go there here but stick to the very important subject of the rivers close season which remains extremely important to river anglers.

 

Regards,

 

Lee.