A call to arms.

[Nugg]

Ah now

Hunting on a cycle is something different,..................................................................

[DCB]

Yippee!

Come Saturday I'll be winging my way to Kenya to fish for big yellowfin tuna for a couple of weeks.

How I'll miss the friendly cut and thrust of angling politics???

DCB

[Peter Sharpe]

If the fox hunters were made to go chasing over the fields on orange Chopper bikes, and using landing nets, that would be fine by me. In fact I'd probably pay to watch.

[trent.barbeler]

Dear Alan,

 

What a cracking post!

 

Dear Peter, (Waller)

 

I am quite glad you started this thread myself. For one thing, it has given those participating in it the chance to air their various views on the subjuct matter you chose to bring up. Personally, I think that this is a good thing. Of course as is mostly the case, the original threads intended subject can "stray" off. I accept my part blame for this and apologise.

 

Back to you Alan,

 

Well, lets have a look at your post.

 

According to you, I am now;

 

Inconsiderate. Rubbisher of considered thoughts?

Blissfully ignorant.

[trent.barbeler]

Oops. Hit the wrong button. I'll try again.

 

Dear Alan,

 

What a cracking post!

 

Dear Peter, (Waller)

 

I am quite glad you started this thread myself. For one thing, it has given those participating in it the chance to air their various views on the subjuct matter you chose to bring up. Personally, I think that this is a good thing. Of course as is mostly the case, the original threads intended subject can "stray" off. I accept my part blame for this and apologise.

 

Back to you Alan,

 

Well, lets have a look at your post.

 

According to you, I am now;

 

Inconsiderate. Rubbisher of considered thoughts?

Blissfully ignorant. Ignorant. Bigot. No stategist of vision? Arrantly stupid. Unfit to continue to take a leading role within anglings body politic?

 

Was it something I said? And did you manage to write all that all by yourself? Well done if you did.

 

Sorry I have not responded earlier to your post Alan but I have been out fishing.

 

But I will. Later, in the appropriate manner.

 

Good post though Alan all the same.

 

Regards,

 

Lee.

[Jim Roper]

DMCA:

I don't own a house, a car, or even a decent haircut at the moment so I'm out I think

Res ipsa loquitur

 

Jim Roper

 

http://www.march-info.org

http://www.weymouth.gov.uk/harbourcam.htm

http://www.weymouth.gov.uk/beachcam.htm

http://www.searchlineuk.com/FishList.htm

http://www.thisisdorset.net

[waggler]

Its time to stand up and be counted! If you love your sport join the march before its to late

[Peter Waller]

I do LOVE MY SPORT, with a lifelong, heart-felt passion. Thats precisely why I won't be attending!

[trent.barbeler]

Dear Alan,

 

As promised, here is my reply to your post when you attacked my personality, my good name, and my "fitness to carry on in angling politics".

 

According to you, I am now;

 

Inconsiderate. Rubbisher of considered thoughts?

Blissfully ignorant. Ignorant. Bigot. No stategist of vision? Arrantly stupid. Unfit to continue to take a leading role within anglings body politic?

 

Now Alan, please understand this; Whilst I may not agree with what it is that you say, your opinions, or points of view on all sorts of angling related subjects, I would NEVER. EVER. Stoop to using personal (possibly libelous but I'm a big boy now) remarks when disagreeing with what it is you had to say. I find that sort of thing pointless, and altogether childish.

 

By doing so,I would render myself totally inept within any serious debating medium. And indeed, would convey to a wider audience that I was incapable of serious thought, insight, and lack of understanding of being able to see someone elses point of view even though my own were different.

 

I keep personalities to one side. Because they have nothing to do with what is said. Within debate, it is the words spoken that remains important. Important that is until someone comes in giving specific labels as to what a persons personality is. Labels that are listed above for instance.

 

Your Quote Alan is;

 

"As I said before in a point that you so obviously missed in you ignorance and bigotry when you went for the attack on me. This administration would not have even considered the introduction of legislation had hunting been a black, gay or urban issue"

 

No Alan. I did not attack you. I disagreed with what you said. I did not miss that particular point either. I did not respond to that particular piece in your post for two reasons.

 

1. I had no intention of bringing in the Black or Gay communities of our country into the hunting debate. Why on Gods Earth would you choose to do so? Or choose to give these two sections in our society within your percieved scenario as to why this present government wants to ban hunting with dogs? Make no sense.

 

2. I always thought that the whole issue surrounding foxhunting, that is for those that want to see it baned, was based totally on their opinion (understandably) that the practice was a barbaric one. Cruel and unacceptable in todays modern society.

 

Have "I" missed something here?

 

Your quote Alan;

 

"I have indeed hunted myself in the dim and distant past (the 1970s) riding as a guest at the Gothland hunt".

 

Its now 2002 Alan. Young chap were you when you last hunted?

 

Your quote Alan;

 

"The reality is that whether you like it or not... the public perception of hunting with dogs is the classical one I laid out as before, you have to remember that the vast majortiy of the population is urban and not rural....This may have escaped your notice! The reality is that whether you like it or not... the public perception of hunting with dogs is the classical one I laid out as before, you have to remember that the vast majortiy of the population is urban and not rural....This may have escaped your notice! Few local 'Characters'in Blackpool hunt with lurchers....Nowadays this type of 'character' is robbing CD systems out of your car or flogging drugs".

 

The first part of the above quote troubles me. Exactly what is it you are driving at? The Urban population strongly disagrees with foxhunting? Not so I'm afraid. Most dont give a damn. Until of course someone bothers to ask a tiny sample of them in the high street. Or is it that you believe the Urban majority (whoever they are) has the God given right to oversee country sporting practices because there is possibly more of them than there are living in rural areas?

 

If this is so, then look out Shooting. Look out Falconry. Look out lots of other things. And look out Fishing. Because its NOT just fishing that is regarded as a "Town and Country" passtime. The reality is, fishing and all else listed "IS" carried on in the countryside for their most part. And "IS" supported and practiced by those that live in towns and rural areas.

 

As for the later part of that quote, i.e. the "Few local 'Characters'in Blackpool hunt with lurchers....Nowadays this type of 'character' is robbing CD systems out of your car or flogging drugs"? Congratulations Alan! In one short quote you have now relegated the people in the Blackpool area that like to own and hunt with a lurcher, to the leagues of the car CD thief, or to the lofty heights of the drug dealer. Now did you realise that those words would NOT be taken as meaning EVERYONE not just the "few" in Blackpool? Or indeed, anywhere else in the country amid the sporting communities that hunt rabbits etc with Lurchers? As soon as you start to paint pictures with the old "black" brush, the intended area tends to get well covered. Start off painting the fence black, and the whole street gets a lick of paint. Didn't you realise this most basic of political skills Alan? Have you got the coffee pot on?

 

Your quote Alan;

 

"Now I suggest fella that you wake up and smell the coffee and accept that whatever good the gentry do for their local communities such work is commonly ignored by the vast majority of the urban population as they have no contact with it".

 

There you go again Alan. Pressuming to know what it is that Urban people know. Urban people by and large dont come into contact with the gentry as say, those in the countryside do, thats true. But are you telling me that Urban people dont have a brain? Dont read newspapers or watch television? Dont have within their families, members that DO live in the countryside? Is all information relating to the countryside hidden behind a wall that one drives through when going into rural communities? And what about the "gentry" who ALL have town and city homes? Dont these people go out or become involved in Urban/Town issues? How many of these gentry labeled families own houses, offices etc in Urban locations that are rented or leased to Urban people?

 

Perhaps it is YOU Alan that do not realise exactly how many towns people come into contact with the landed gentry. Smell the coffee? Do you know how to make a cup Alan?

 

Your Quote Alan;

 

"As somebody who has voluntarily placed themselves in the vanguard of angling politcs with the defence of our pastime as a central part of it's core, your lack of strategic vision quite frankly alarms me.

 

To attempt to attack me without being in possession of any knowledge about me I would regard as showing worrying signs of arrant stupidity at best and I have to wonder at your fitness to continue to take a leading role within anglings body politic where a wider 'real world' view is needed".

 

Be aware Alan, I take the criticism's of my angling political ability extremely seriously. I face such criticism with an open mind, an open heart. I pride myself as being the bearer of truth, and defender for all those I am "ELECTED" to represent. That is why, myself and those who created the RSSG INSISTED that one year terms in office was the maximum one could hold before re-election takes place. This is so RSSG personel can be constantly approved by their membership. If one doesn't perform, or represent the membership as the membership expects, then your OUT!! Simple as that.

 

So far, I have had not one single RSSG member contact me with any concerns they have about my political ability. And I recieve the total backing from the RSSG committee that deals with the RSSG's political/environmental side.

 

What exactly are your concerns based on Alan?

 

Who is it that you represent that gives you such a wealth of experience in deciding who is capable and who is not capable to represent angling memberships?

 

Is it because I disagree with your points of view, or the way that you put them?

 

Or is it because I speak out against what I see as clearly going wrong in SAA? I am aware that you are very pro- David Bird and Co. Is it because I question them over certain SAA stuff?

 

If its the first? Expect more disagreement from me because contrary to what you might pressume, your views haven't impressed me so far. (notice I didn't say YOU Alan? Theres the difference. Is the coffee bubbling away Alan)

 

If its the second? I represent the RSSG and its members. As such, I will continue to fight for its effective, involved voice within the SAA. But whilst doing so I appreciate the work that others in SAA already do. Even they know that. Angling needs such men. Men in my opinion, that should be payed full time to represent us (angling) My gripe is that the SAA/NAA PR is NOT what it should be (you agreed on that at the last meeting yourself Alan but so far have not come up with an answer or suggestion to my knowledge) and that the RSSG is NOT being involved within the SAA on anything. AS YET.

 

But we will keep on trying. Keep on asking questions. Asking to be fully involved.

 

If that entails asking here on an open forum, so be it. We dont ask anything openly before we ask privately. But we WILL continue until the SAA/NAA PR improves and until the RSSG has the input within it as fully paid up constituent body members. Was it not the SAA/NAA who were telling angling not so long ago? "You must become a member to be involved"? Well, we joined and want to become involved. Please Alan, correct me if I'm wrong.

 

On the other hand Alan, regarding my own inabilities. Attend the RSSG AGM and stand for my job. Get yourself proposed/seconded and stand for election against me. I willingly except the challenge.

 

And as for the SAA? You can remain in the same furrow plodding the same course all you like. Or you can look for changes in its PR, suggest changes infact like we have, and begin to plough the whole field. Attract more members. Get more people involved. Get the SAA properly funded. Thats the RSSG vision. Whats yours? Remain the same? Do you actually have a vision for the SAA that is your own Alan? Or do you rely on David and the others to come up with ideas for you?

 

See Alan? Ive managed to post against everything you say whilst not calling you names once.

 

I bear no malice, hold no grudges. I leave that for others to become bogged down in.

 

And by the way, I dont drink coffee. I'm an Englishman. I drink Guiness.

 

And if you DO insist on slagging down my personality further, might I suggest you do it privately.

 

Regards,

 

Lee.

[Peter Sharpe]

I don't know about your suitability for angling politics, but as an MP, you'd certainly come in useful for talking a Bill out of time in The House of Commons