Don't Believe What You Read On Internet Forums!

[Anglers' Net]

Angling Trust Blog from Mark Lloyd

 

Click here to view the full article

[Steve Coppolo]

Angling Trust Blog from Mark Lloyd

 

Click here to view the full article

 

Ha ha ha, life through the eyes of Mark Lloyd. Well, I suppose it's 'interesting', if nothing else.

 

 

 

Still, that's his opinion and he's fully entitled to express it. Just the same as everyone who goes angling is fully entitled to express their's about the Angling Trust which, after all said and done, claims to represent us ALL.

[barry luxton]

Put a few comments here as i tried to leave comments under the blog but was not able to.

 

 

Message for Mr Lloyd

 

come clean over the eel take ban, show us transparently when the sea committee met to discuss the issue as the trust had pointed out at that time. Your explanation regarding minutes on this issue are not acceptable. What happened. Who decided that it was in the rsa's best interests? Their representative heads up over the parapet please. How did you come to the conclusion that the rsa wanted the tope take ban to continue if you didn't liaise with them. The above is an example of what you are doing for the rsa, then, no thanks. Leads nicely to your point that you represent the rsa. How about actually asking the rsa if they wish you to represent them. You mention listening to the rsa, yet you closed down your forum web site because even your own members where revolting, why do you think rsa who are not in your club go along with your views that you and David are the right people to rep the rsa.

 

Do you think the trust and the MCS are doing a good job for the rsa with regards to the mcz project?

 

A reply for all to see as an extension to your blog will be acceptable, seeing that you and the trust can't 'get on' with web site forums. This blog is yet more example of talking at the rsa as opposed to talking to them don't you think. Sign in and start talking, or is it just too much.

 

 

Despise this bit, the rsa on open and transparent forums are certainly not faceless, far from it, perhaps they require full and open explanation re the above before 'joining' in. What about the good rsa guys who have left the trust after frustratingly trying to do their bit? It's a particular rsa guy's idea to set up a Internet list of the new sfc guys who are acting for the rsa, i see your letters muscling in on the same have just gone out this week.

 

Quote:

 

I believe this because some people reading these threads might actually believe that the organisation set up to represent and protect anglers is in some way out to get them, or to damage their interests, which is patently nonsense. I believe this because it creates a poisonous atmosphere which prevents anglers working together for our common interests. I believe this because the individuals who give up their evenings and weekends to volunteer or work beyond their contracted hours to do all they can for the good of angling and do not deserve to be criticised and undermined by faceless individuals. I believe this because angling’s enemies are looking on and rubbing their hands with glee as they see us expending all our energies on fighting between ourselves and splitting into rival factions, rather than working together, united in a common purpose of battling for the best deal for all angling and anglers.

Edited March 6, 2011 by barry luxton

[Steve Coppolo]

You can't polish a turd.

[Bob Shotter]

You can't polish a turd.

 

Have you tried then Steve if so I hope you washed your hands?

 

Tight lines Bob

[Worms]

We believe that fighting for improved fish stocks is the most important issue affecting sea angling.

 

Wasn't that what they were trying to do when they made C+R compulsory in coarse angling?

[barry luxton]

Wasn't that what they were trying to do when they made C+R compulsory in coarse angling?

And they made that so after the consultation period had finished, remember the thank's for keeping the door open copy letter.

 

 

err that copy letter was obtained under the freedom of information act and freely given by the e a Mr Lloyd.

Edited March 6, 2011 by barry luxton

[rabg]

first up,just let me say im appalled that anglers net allow promotion of a political organisation on its front page without the right to reply on that same page.

i trust anglers net will have the same headline space for someone like steve coppollo or barry luxton to write an article countering mark lloyds claims ?

 

the response i wished to post in the comments section below mark lloyds rant are as follows :all i can say is thank god i live in scotland.how hypocritical is it to say the trust will only help the government collect data on RSA catches once the government tell them what the information will be used for,yet they wont disclose their own minutes arising from private meetings discussing proposals that have the potential to affect all sea anglers,NOT just their own members.

Mr lloyd,feel free to represent anyone that pays you to represent them,but those are the ONLY anglers you are entitled to represent,you are not the representative body for all anglers ,whatever you may claim.

once again the issues raised on internet forums are skirted around to paint a very different picture of what the actual problem is.due to the low numbers of sea angling members ,the AT has no mandate to represent sea angling as a whole,yet seeks to do so.

situations like the eel legislation and how it was handled by the AT,and the fact that many AT high rollers are single species specialists or specimen hunters mean the policies being pushed by the AT are far removed from the outlook of many rank and file sea anglers ,and indeed could have a negative effect on how ordinary sea anglers go about their hobby.the views of the national anguila club,the national mullet club and B.A.S.S are all very well for the members of those groups,but they are a far cry from those of the ordinary angler.

at this point in time ,the greatest threat to sea angling has nothing to do with getting more and bigger fish,the fish are doing a grand job of this themselves at the moment.the biggest threat is maintaining our historical right to fish without let or hindrance,and any group that takes sea angling into bed with governmental orgs has not done its homework,as the result will be restriction and added cost,with little or nothing in return.

lastly,it would be nice if the AT would recognise other peoples right to criticise something they do not agree with.i accept fully the AT,s right to do as it pleases with regard to its members,but if its going to get involved in anything that has the potential to affect all sea anglers,then it has to accept the ones that are not members have a right to question,and expect answers.

robert gallacher

[Bob Shotter]

Dear Mr Mark Lloyd

 

I would urge you to follow this link for my response which is offered in an open and transparent way.

 

It will also give you the opportunity to prove you are what you claim and ready to do right by those you represent and unite in the common cause.>>>

 

http://www.rsa-uk.org/showthread.php?47-Th...here.&p=114 post 4 & 5

 

In return you can be assured that I would personally support any efforts where it is proven that we have common ground and I would recommend the members concider doing the same.

 

Tight lines

Bob Shotter

Edited March 6, 2011 by Deene'0

[Steve...]

I am concerned at the AT's representations to date. How have the AT helped sea anglers to date?