National Federation of Anglers

[Guest David]

I hear a lot said about the NFA and what anglers feel about it, in the main most seem to believe it is only for the match angler and the Nationals. This I am pleased to say is far from the truth, they look after all aspects of the sport. And if you want to carry on fishing they are the ones who will be there making it happan, while the rest of us do next to nothing but enjoy our days fishing. For the past few years I have been an indervidual member of the NFA which cost me all of £5 per year to ensure our sport is looked after and we can go on fishing. If you are not sure of what the NFA do but listen to those who know nothing but know every thing look at the NFA web site and or drop them a line get the facts and not the fiction? I am not an NFA official just a nermal club angler who wants to continue to enjoy fishing. Why not splash out and become an indervidual member and make our sport the best.Support the NFA so they can support you.

[Guest Graham E]

And bung a few quid to the ACA also because no clean water - No fish - No fishermen - No NFA!

 

G

[Guest waterman1013]

David raises an important point.

 

The Government recognises the NFA as the Governing Body for coarse fishing. All the other coarse angling bodies have to come to terms with this if we are to get unity and recognition from Sport England.

 

The problem is that the constitution of NFA is driven by regional and national votes on matters of policy (democracy at work) and most of the other coarse angling bodies can work faster than NFA when it comes to policy making. I think there are those in NFA who recognise the strengths of many of the smaller bodies, i.e. SACG, and who are trying to change the way NFA operates.

 

If more individuals joined NFA then change might come that much faster and angling could start to enjoy more sports funding as a result, especially for training programmes for youngsters, who need angling, as an outlet, as much as angling needs them.

 

Graham makes a valuable point about ACA, 800,000 coarse licences are sold each year and ACA has just 18,000 members. I am proud to say I've been a member since 1961. Every club should be affiliated to ACA to protect their waters, ACA can do nothing for non-members under the terms of their constitution, and every angler should be supporting the vital work they do in protecting waters from polluters.

 

Mike

[Guest Steve Burke]

As some of you will know I'm a staunch supporter of the ACA and have been for many years. Indeed all the profits on The Book of the Perch went to the ACA.

 

However I'm not an individual member of the NFA and have no plans to join at present. The reason is simple: the NFA are match dominated whilst the SACG represents specialist anglers like me. Both do excellent work. What is needed is an umbrella organisation such as we used to have with the National Angling Council and to which the NFA, the SACG and the other bodies such as the Salmon & Trout Association and the National Federation of Sea Anglers could be affiliated. The NFA could even perhaps be renamed the National Federation of Coarse Match Anglers. However, for various reasons I understand the old NAC was unsuccessful and was disbanded, but this doesn't mean that the idea was wrong, just its execution.

 

It's vital that angling unites otherwise our pastime will be seriously threatened. Thankfully there are encouraging signs that this will happen but there's a long way to go yet.

 

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

Wingham Fisheries

www.anglersnet.co.uk/fisheries/wingham.htm

[Guest David]

Steve

This idea of thr NFA being match oriantated is not correct have a lok at their web site. The NFA is for all fresh water anglers. I would like to see one large NFA with sections for course, sea and game fishing all pulling together, instead of being so many groups united we stand devided we fall, in some ways I feel we have not gone down this road because to many like being the boss.

[Guest davidP]

I also can't agree that all the NFA does is for match anglers - it's simply that of all the work they do organising the various Nationals gets the most publicity.

I will concede that with the infux of match squads joining the NFA, and with the exodus of some of the larger clubs and associations that the membership balance has shifted a little bit, so much so that if you go to the conference you really would think that all they do is matches, but it's still a fact that whilst the Nationals are important, the other work they do is far more vital to the cause and it's not the sort of stuff that gets discussed/voted on at conference. And unless it's changed recently then all votes are taken according to the number of paid-up club members. This means that one 200 member club has equal voting to 10 twenty-man match squads which goes a long way to making the voting a more balanced affair.

 

I've said for years that the NFA don't shout loud enough about what they do for angling, but I suppose that reporting on all the meetings and consultative committees they attend or all the official reports they respond too isn't particularly sexy for a Press that mainly seems to want picture of fat fish or the opportunity to use the word 'slam'.

 

[This message has been edited by davidP (edited 03 May 2000).]

[Guest Steve Burke]

I agree that the NFA does excellent work and said this in my last post. However, despite this, I don't accept that it is the right organisation to represent coarse fishing as a whole. Neither for that matter is the SACG, which also does a sterling job for angling in general, despite many of the committee being friends of mine (sorry lads!).

 

What I'd like to see is the umbrella organisation I referred to earlier, amongst whose officers would be both NFA & SACG committee members. To this would be added the representatives of the other fishery bodies. Each of these bodies, including the NFA and the SACG, would also retain their identities and existing roles within their own branches of the sport.

 

In fact this umbrella organisation could still even be called the NFA! Provided that the organisation of matches was delegated to a separate organisation(the National Federation of Coarse Match Anglers?)and a separate conference I'd be happy. However I doubt that this would happen in practice so I'd prefer my original suggestion with a new name for the umbrella organisation. This would then have the support of all anglers and a strong, united voice in dealing with the government and non-angling interests.

 

 

 

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

Wingham Fisheries

www.anglersnet.co.uk/fisheries/wingham.htm

[Guest RobStubbs]

David/Steve,

I think it's fair to say the NFA has got better in recent years but that's probably because they were going the way of the dinosaurs ! They also suffer in that as far as the masses are concerned the NFA are a match organiser. Now I know that's not the full story but the NFA don't exactly publicise what they do, and they certainly don't attract specialist anglers.

 

I think it's fair to say (as Mike did) that they are recognised as the governing body for coarse angling by those that matter. So to get change probably neccesitates at least a closer alliance between the NFA and the other bodies. It could even end up with a merging of groups into the NFA so as to get government recognition and support for all facets of coarse angling.

 

Rob.

[Guest ken]

interesting points all, i noticed that noone has mentioned the coaching aspect to the NFA as i actually live in scotland and am active in the coaching side of the Scottish federation for coarse anglers.(yes there are some in scotland as well!)

 

due to the abundance of water south of the border, the NFA and ACA all do brilliant jobs for the areas. however north of the border we do not have a body like the NFA.

 

the federation is a non profit organisation made up of pationate anglers, all fighting for the good of the sport. we do get involved in the politics of the sport but also advise the member clubs and non member clubs as to what is going on.

 

the coaching aspect is just another string in the bow to evolve the sport into the future. considering the NFA run various courses for coaching and are resonably priced, why do more clubs not take advantage of this valuable resource?

 

comments please.

[Guest David]

Ken

The coaching is just a small part of what the NFA do, many anglers do not take the trouble to find out what the NFA is about in its full roll, however its alwayseasy to point the finger at those who do the work.

Like the ACA the NFA helps protect our waters and the rights of the anglers, they have my full support. Even if I do not always agree with their actions, a bit like voting for government?