An Angling Society (what do you want)

[Scott]

This forum has become a bit political recently, with good reason. Anglers are divided and will become defeated, we need to act now.

 

IMHO this is what I would like to see:

 

1 Angling body,

Made up of senior members of all the clubs, societys etc This way the average angler will at least know some of the names and be able to relate to them.

With other individuals such as Bruno Broughton etc that can bring their expertise to the body.

 

For all (or as many as posible) fisherys to recognise this angling body and offer discounts to all its members.

 

To utilise our big name celebrity anglers to help our public image.

I'm not being funny but who would you rather see on the doorstep of No 10 speaking for anglers Chris Tarrant & John Wilson or 2 people you've never heard off from the NAA.

 

Have a monthly magazine, a yearly fishing show/convention get every angler joining and proudly wearing the badge, get the badge on the back of every anglers car. Get our image as well known as the Greenpeace/WWF etc logos

 

Deal with the trouble makers, litter louts, stroke pullers and dead wood that screw it up for us all, by refusing them membership by notifying fisherys (that support us and can refuse acces to them) and leaving them no-where to fish.

 

If Bob Nudd was part of the commity, would you as a match angler feel your fishing was being represented?

Same for sea fishing match anglers if Alan Yates was there as well.

Carp, Pike, Barbel etc

Bob Church representing the fly fishing members.

These are just names off the top of my head, a public vote, perhaps through the clubs or through the mags/weeklies would give a better idea.

 

The same would apply to every other branch of our sport, a well know (in that type of fishing) name at the top of the tree.

 

A club/body/society (call it what you will) like this would I feel be able to raise funds to employ professional people (lawyers etc) to fight our cause.

 

The splits might (should) not happen because everyone would feel that there was at least 1 person at the top that understands their type of fishing.

 

Of course there would still be arguments, but if these people could put aside their egos and work for the good of fishing it could work.

 

Is this possible? What does everyone think?

 

Scott.

[Mally]

Its a good/nice idea mate, but i cant see it ever happening, being realistic, who are you gonna get to organise it? its would probably take several people in full time employment, whos gonna set it up? As i say a really nice idea and i hope it does happen but i cant see it!

[Nugg]

Come on now Mally, don't be so pessimistic, let's start looking for somewhere to plant that little acorn, granted it will have to be tended very gentely to begin with, and with care could grow into one of the most sort after types of wood one can get.

[Peter Waller]

In principal we have just such a 'society' up and running. Its called the National Angling Allience. But after its lack lustre performance re the livebait issue, I must say, I'm disappointed.

 

Other than that we have the RSSG, it just needs to get bigger and bigger and bigger!

 

We certainly don't need any more Angling Societies, heaven forbid. We just need to get the one we have got up and running, sharpen its claws and pop a bomb under both its arse and the arse of angling in general. Angling needs to support what it has, it needs to dip its collective hands into its collective pockets.

 

[ 07. August 2002, 11:41 PM: Message edited by: Peter Waller ]

[chesters1]

very similar to what i wrote on a much earlier (and hotly debated post) to set up a permanent "commitee" the tackle manufactureres could be asked to donate the running costs ,it would be in their intrests after all if angling was banned then they would be the losers in sales etc.

instead of silly initials of groups (mostly cliques of "specialist" anglers) maybe it could be called the confederation of or united angling license user`s

this would encompass all anglers not groups of single species anglers ,the groups could be in the second tier advising the top etchelon (hopefully independant thinking individuals) of angling faces ,maybe a lawyer etc,people recognised in everyday life ,who could speak with one voice to the press etc.

all the time the groups are fighting for dominance our anti groups are planning and plotting

[Chris63]

It appears to me, that most of the people who really care about angling, it's future and the like, and who are prepared to be vocal in their opinions, visit this website, or some of the other high profile and serious/sensible websites.

 

As has been said by others, both on this post and on the livebaiting post, there are already a large number of bodies/associations out there who "represent" the angling community. Whilst I believe they all operate with good intent, their effectiveness varies from poor to mediocre in most cases.

 

As Scott said in his post which started this thread, what is really needed is "high profile" angling names to be involved. What has also been said is that to co-ordinate everyone would be a full time job.

 

However,is there not a way of co-ordinating something through the main web-sites. From visiting them, there seems to be a number of people that have the opportunity to spend a fair amount of time on line, and could therefore prehaps volunteer to put together a plan for a web based cross class (angling - match,specimen,game, sea etc)organisation, that has the ability to collate and centralize views/issues etc.

I know the various controllers of the main websites do speak to each other, and I'm sure between them they have the knowledge to create something on the web that can be accessed from all sites.

This is only a suggestion, and has been written as I've thought it, so I appreciate that I have probably overlooked some obvious pitfalls whilst typing this.

[trent.barbeler]

Dear All,

 

Ever heard of that famous angler Jan Cappel?

 

No? But he's the Secretary General of the European Anglers Alliance. And if you want to see a really professionally run organisation that works for its own members, and those outside of their membership right up into the EU at the very highest level then look no further than the EAA.

 

Jan of course is NOT a famous person or a named angler. But the EAA demonstates absolutely just what IS possible when anglers all pull together. And the EAA have five million anglers under their umbrella taking up the strain on the rope!!

 

So the question remains, can such a thing ever get off the ground over here?

 

My Lord. Thats a question.

 

English angling history paints a dour picture with all previous attempts to unify British anglers all but failing. And; Is the present NAA structure actually working? And if it is, for who? The ordinary angler? The angler making up the overal majority of anglers in this country that flatly refuse to join anything?

 

Its all quite a sticky situation really.

 

The present NAA structure consists of six bodies. Fair enough if you are representing one of the six and are allowed to go to NAA meetings.

But where does this voice for angling leave the majority of anglers? You know, the ones that buy the majority of fishing tackle/bait etc on sale. Or fund all the angling clubs across the land?

 

Why the hell doesn't the NAA promote or contain, individual membership within it? I find it highly strange that they dont seek individual membership from the majority of our nations anglers. But then again, would they join anyway? I have my doubts.

 

Should this pessimistic outlook prevent us from looking for the angling Holy grail though?

 

I am one of many who passionately believe that angling should have the ONE body looking after our long term interests. I dont however feel that the NAA in its present form is that body.

 

OK. So I will get shouted down by some, if not most, in angling politics today but what the hell, I am a brave man who always speaks his mind.

 

What I would like to see, is a NAA that is NOT controlled by a mere six bodies. I would like to see a NAA that has as its committee "elected" officers coming from those groups already in NAA and further NAA committee members from those groups/fishing organisations who are not. Yes, and even reserved places for ordinary anglers to sit on this committee as well.

 

In effect, a NAA working committee that is made up of the broadest section of anglers. Added to that, the NAA should fund paid professionals to represent the working committees agenda

 

These professional representatives would be paid for by having individual members of NAA. Backed up by professionally structured fundraising efforts etc etc.

 

This is basically my vision for protecting angling in this country.

 

But no need to hang on to your hats as the angling train hurltles by. Because in our country, trains go painfully slow. They arrive late, and in some cases, dont arrive at all.

 

I'll duck out now for a while whilst the political propaganda machine moves in! Again.

 

Regards,

 

Lee.

 

PS. Thanks for mentioning the RSSG Peter. If only our countries un-joined angling majority joined us? Muddy boots in Parliament? I quite like that idea.

[Chris Goddard]

Some good posts here from (Respected? Anglers - Well you are In my humble opinion anyway!!) But the original idae re: big names!! That is something I think most would agree would make people stand up and be counted. How much for a deposit for a seat for an election?? Mr Bell did It! Why not Mr wilson??

 

Chris

[JamesBond]

The real problem in angling today, is the same one that has afflicted the sport for years. There are too many "National" organisations representing themselves. The last time I took any notice there were over 20 different bodies purporting to represent anglers nationally.

 

For the NAA to be able to honestly claim to be a united voice for angling it needs to be representative of more than the 6 bodies so far involved.

 

Unfortunately this is never going to happen. Why? Too many vested interests. Each national organisation currently has a "head". In too many instances the person filling this post is only really interested in being the head of that body. It's the big fish in a small pool syndrome.

 

I agree with the thrust of what you are suggesting Scott, but having met many of the leaders of the various bodies over the years, and having had many "interesting" discussions it isn't going to happen.

 

Why is it that the RSPB has a massive full time staff, well organised reserves, a huge bank balance, and serious political clout?

 

Because it represents all those in the UK who care about birds. No-one asks do you like garden birds, woodland birds, sea birds, rare birds. No-one cares if you go watching in company, by yourself, or for two week long sessions. You are not judged by what equipment you carry with you. They rejoice in the variety that is found within the RSPB. The argue among themselves, but never lose site that they are united in promoting the interests of birds at every opportunity.

 

If angling took a leaf out of their book it could make a huge difference. But unfortunately it never will.

 

Angling needs to be shaken AND stirred.

 

007

[John Ellison]

I've just clocked up 42 years as an angler, I've sea fished, fly fished, but mainly coarse and over the years the opinions I've heard, the papers I've read, the waffling I've listened to, I conclude this!

 

The only thing that anglers will ever agree on - is to differ. I seriously think that the only common ground we all undisputedly have, is that we want to catch fish, after that forget it.

Some want to kill all pike, others worship them.

Some snatch 5 hours once a week match fishing others sit days on end asleep waiting for a fish that the matchman will never encounter in a lifetime. Two club's in the same town will murder to lease a water before the other side gets it.

The NFA attempts to be the coarse anglers champion, but how can that be so when hundreds of thousands of anglers are not members of it.

Once in a while, we get, 'why don't we have a national angling centre'. It would never be a National angling centre to the bloke who wheels his tackle to the local lake in a wheelbarrow, because he's happy enough to fish locally. Ask him to fund a grandiose scheme in Milton Keynes when he lives in Cumbria, it can't happen.

 

I would like to see a shift in this direction!

 

To become a member of the NFA for example, to qualify for membership YOU MUST make one of your club'swaters leased/owned accessible to ALL NFA members.

This way, I'm on holiday in Bedfordshire for instance and I am a member of an affiliated club

then I can fish their nominated water as part of the per capita subscription I pay to the NFA.

Not unsimilar to the way the Club and Institute Union works. Now this is starting to sound a bit more like a NATIONAL INSTITUTION don't you think!

--------------------------------------------------

Eeeeeeeeeeee older I get the better I was.